-AWFN- Read Page (Thesis-2nd Quarter)
Full Circle The Mysteries Uncloaked Globe D —c

In Full Circle: The Mysteries Uncloaked I learned of the origin and purpose of existence. However, although I traced the development the Root-Races through Egyptian and Mesopotamian history, it was not until the second part of this thesis that I discovered how the Divine plan operated within historical periods.  Click to Read the Intro
Click (left below) on the SECTION to read it   -or-  Click (right below) on PDF File

We send a warm Thank-You to © US Games for allowing us the use of
The Rider-Waite Tarot Deck


Click to Hear Daniel's Lion by PNEUMA-YOD
Know Thyself Initiative

Know Thyself Initiative

Become a -KTI- Member: 
Click for Membership Info.
...Thank You.

PLEASE Read THE KTI (left)
Information Before Visiting:


Please use the surrounding icon-links for your convenience...Also:

AFWN References Link


SECTION 8A-B-C 1558 C.E 1750 C.E.

Root Race 6: sub-race 5 - Root Race 7: sub-race 2



I said earlier, the “upstepping” that took place during the Renaissance was very important, because it was a major “upstepping” with the emergence of the first sub-race of Root-Race 7. However, as was shown there were several reasons for its importance; one reason concerned the conjunction of 1525, which caused a shift and rise in the vibration and energy of the mass consciousness. Another reason was The Buddha’s plan was initiated with The Holy Spirit/Guan Yin working with the Dalai Lamas to transmute emotions. The last reason was the change in reincarnation, both for the Human Race and What-has-Been-Willed, Sophia and Melchizedek. With such an important and major “upstepping” occurring, one could be tempted to think this “upstepping” would be almost anti-climatic, but that would be a mistake. From a consciousness perspective this “upstepping” was also important, because it marked a unique change in Spiritual Evolution. That change concerned the role Root-Race 5’s consciousness played in Globe D.

The unique change was after 1558, although still being present; Root-Race 5 is no longer a part of the driving impetus for the Life Principle. Let me explain, throughout Spiritual Evolution, the development of the consciousness has been driven by the Life Principle, which has evolved through multiple life-forms. At every stage of Spiritual Evolution, the Life Principle is intertwined with the highest consciousness on Earth. When the Life Principle evolved into Homo sapiens sapiens the highest consciousness on Earth became the modern Human Race, which was in turn evolving through the Root-Races. Before the separation of Globe D and after the emergence of Root-Race 3, there was always the consciousness of three Root-Races driving the Life Principle on Earth, with the highest Root-Race’s consciousness the governing influence. However, if you look at the diagram of the Root-Races above, you will see that after the Life Principle in the Human Race transferred from Root-Race 5 into Root-Race 7, through Root-Race 6 there is a change. In the next “upstepping” (this one) the Life Principle was now only being driven by two Root-Races, 6 and 7.
When we incorporate the physical changes in frequency through the Astrological influences and the rise in the Schumann Resonance that occurred in Section 7c, this “upstepping” takes on an even greater importance. However, there is an even greater difference in Spiritual Evolution that was initiated in the previous “upstepping” that affected the consciousness of the Life Principle in this “upstepping.” This was the drastic change to the rules in reincarnation.
I said in the previous section that when Sophia and her partner What-has-been-Willed reincarnated they remained in their genders and that this was not the case for the rest of Humanity. However, I was jumping the gun a little, because before 1525 and the shift, men and women always reincarnated within their gender and there were no cross gender reincarnations. However, after the shift and the emergence of the last Root Race for Globe D that no longer applied. Now, both genders could reincarnate in either gender.
Another point that makes this “upstepping” especially significant is because it was during this “upstepping” that the European colonization of North America took place. As a result both sides were “busy” trying to influence/inspire all the nations that would be involved in the colonization; consequently this “upstepping” is jam-packed with individuals and events that would be relevant to the founding of America. Because of this, like the previous “upstepping”, I have divided this Section into separate parts, but instead of two, I have divided it into three parts.
Another change in this Section is that it does not always follow a chronological order, because the three parts concern specific “campaigns” launched by both sides. The first part (A) will include the initial colonization of Mexico and South America by the Spanish Conquistadors and the fall of the indigenous empires in the New World. However, this part also discusses how the “Light” ensured the preservation of ancient sanctuaries. The dominant persons of part (A) are the three Spanish conquistadors and the Jesuits that led the expeditions to the Americas, Queen Elizabeth of England, William Shakespeare and Sir Francis Bacon. Part (B) will deal with developments in Europe during the Catholic Counter-Reformation and the Baroque Era. It also addresses the “Light’s” plan for Europe and how that plan was thwarted by the “Shadow.” Some of the most influential people in part (B) are King James of England, Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Gian Bernini, the Borgias of Italy, Emperor Rudolph II and the King and Queen of Bohemia. Part (C) focuses on the first English Colonies and the different influences on the first colonies in North America. It also includes the English Civil War and the Puritans of New England. Some of the prominent figures for part (C) include King Charles (I), King Charles (II), King William and Queen Mary, King George (III) and John Calvin.

The fact that after the emergence of Root-Race 7 there were cross-gender reincarnations is perfectly demonstrated in the incarnation of Queen Elizabeth. Although she was a powerful woman in her incarnation of the 16th Century, in her previous incarnation she had been a man, most probably a powerful ruler. I know that this may sound a little strange, but the purpose for reincarnation is to unite opposites and transmute the lower emotions. By a powerful male leader incarnating as a powerful female leader, the soul is able to work through the active/masculine energies tempering them with the passive/feminine energies.

We left the last “upstepping” with Princess Elizabeth being crowned Queen Elizabeth (I) of England. However, forty years before she took the throne of England, Spain had begun the colonization of the “New World.”


The conquest of Mexico by the Spanish Conquistadors was a game-changer by the “Shadow.” The “Shadow’s” main agent in this endeavor was the Spaniard Hernán Cortés who was born in Castile, Spain. The entry for Cortés on Wikipedia gives an in depth explanation of the Spanish conquest of Central America.


It seems that Cortés’s “conquest” of Mexico was an “act of open mutiny”, because according to his entry on Wikipedia although “In 1518 the governor of Cuba, Velázquez put him in command of an expedition to explore and secure the interior of Mexico for colonization,” Governor Velázquez “changed his mind and revoked his charter” before the expedition left. In open defiance Cortés left Cuba in a dozen ships with a compliment of only “500 men, 13 horses and a small number of cannons.” Approaching from the east, Cortés first “landed in the Yucatan Peninsula” and encountered not the Mayan, but a Spanish priest of the “Franciscan” order named “Jeronimo de Aguilar.” Evidently, Aguilar had been shipwrecked and been captured by the Mayan. As he had learned to speak “Maya during his captivity”, Aguilar acted as translator between Cortés and the Mayans. Finding the New World occupied did not faze the Spanish conquistador and wasting no time, “In March 1519, Cortés formally claimed the land for the Spanish crown.”
Historians have puzzled over how such a small contingent of men, could have “conquered” such a large force of Mayan warriors? In the previous “upstepping” I related that some Mayan tribes sacrificed to a warrior version of Quetzalcoatl, Tezcatlipoca. However, in the Yucatan the Mayans knew that Tezcatlipoca was the “enemy” of their god Quetzalcoatl. So again I ask how is it possible that the Mayans of theYucatan could mistake the Spanish conquistadors that arrived bearing arms for their god of peace. The answer concerns probably the most tragic case of mistaken identity in the history of man. The reason the conquistadors were mistaken for representatives of Quetzalcoatl, was because they resembled depictions of Quetzalcoatl, which was a white man who wore a beard. The element that clinched the misidentification was the legend that Quetzalcoatl would return carrying the sign of the cross, which of course was fulfilled by the Jesuit priest accompanying Cortés.
Although the Mayans of the Yucatan Peninsula accepted the conquistadors with open arms, not all tribes of Central America were so obliging. The entry relates that Cortés had to fight with the indigenous tribe of Tabasco. However, after his victory Cortés “received from the vanquished twenty young women”, which he immediately converted to Catholicism. “Among these women was La Malinche, his future mistress and mother of his child.” Converting and later marrying Malinche gave Cortés a valuable asset, because she spoke “both the (Aztec) Nahuatl language and Maya, thus enabling Hernán Cortés to communicate in both.” It was through Malinche that Cortés “learned from the Tabascans about the wealthy Aztec Empire and its riches.”
Once he learned of the Aztec Empire, Cortés determined to conquer them, but first he set his eyes on Veracruz, but this city already had a Spanish governor, Velázquez the governor of Cuba. According to the entry “In July 1519, his men took over Veracruz: by this act, Cortés dismissed the authority of the governor of Cuba to place himself directly under the orders of Charles (V).”
This was the first step for Cortés to meet up with the Aztec king Moctezuma (AKA Montezuma). From Veracruz, Cortés tried to approach the Aztec king through “some of Moctezuma’s tributaries.” However, Moctezuma had no desire to accommodate Cortés. To cut a long story short, Cortés made several alliances with native tribes and with their warriors “marched to Cholula, the second largest city in central Mexico.” In Cholula, demonstrating the influence he was under, namely the “Shadow” Cortés “massacred thousands of unarmed members of the nobility gathered at the central plaza, and then partially burned the city.”
Remembering that the Aztecs believed Quetzalcoatl to be a warring god, we may be able to see how the Aztec populace came to see Cortés as “either an emissary of the feathered serpent god Quetzalcoatl or Quetzalcoatl himself.” At first this misidentification was encouraged by the Aztec Emperor Moctezuma (II). As a result, when Cortés “arrived in Tenochtitlán”, the Aztec capital with “a large army”, the populace of the city welcomed him. Evidently, the Aztec Emperor “deliberately let Cortés enter the heart of the Aztec Empire,” in a strategic move in order to learn the conquistador’s “weaknesses better and to crush them later.” The Emperor also tried to bribe the Spaniards with “lavish gifts in gold.” Of course, true to the nature of the “Shadow’s” agents, Cortés did not appreciate Moctezuma’s generosity and “plundered” the city of gold anyway until he amassed “vast amounts of gold.” The final insult Cortés paid to the Aztec Emperor was when he “learned that the Spaniards on the coast had been attacked” Cortés took “Moctezuma as a hostage in his own palace, requesting him to swear allegiance to Charles (V).”
Despite the Spanish conquistadors being in a foreign country they were not a united force. When Cortés had defied Velasquez and taken over Veracruz, the governor “sent another expedition, led by Pánfilo de Narváez.” Narváez landed “in Mexico in April 1520 with 1,100 men.” This forced Cortés to leave Tenochtitlán guarded by only “200 men”, because he needed as many soldiers as possible “to confront Narváez.” It seems that “luck” was on Cortés’ side, because despite being outnumbered he was able to defeat Narváez, “and convince the rest of Narváez’s men to join him.”
Regrettably, the “Shadow’s” influence did not stop with Cortés alone, because while Cortés was away from Mexico the entry relates “one of Cortés’ lieutenants Pedro de Alvarado, committed a massacre in the Main Temple, triggering a local rebellion.” The populace blamed Moctezuma for the massacre and despite Cortés’ efforts to stem the rebellion, Moctezuma “was stoned to death by his subjects on July 1, 1520.” On another occasion, the conquistadors “managed a narrow escape from Tenochtitlán across the causeway, while their backguard was being massacred.” The entry reports “Much of the treasure looted by Cortés was lost (as well as his artillery) during this panicked escape from Tenochtitlán.”
Regardless, of the minor victories the Aztecs had over the conquistadors, their empire was doomed. After a particularly bloody battle, where the Spaniards “lost 870 men” Cortés changed tactics. Help from rival tribes plus the arrival of “reinforcements…from Cuba, allowed Cortés to implement “a policy of attrition towards the island city of Tenochtitlán.” He did this by first “cutting off supplies from the city” and then he “subdued” the Aztecs’ allied cities thus changing the balance.” Finally, Cortés “organized the siege of Tenochtitlán,” which ended in the destruction of the city.
Once Tenochtitlán was destroyed the Aztec Empire crumbled, leaving Cortés “to claim it for Spain” and in 1521 he renamed the former Aztec capital Mexico City. Afterwards, the Hapsburg Holy Roman Emperor Charles (V) “appointed Cortés as governor, captain general, and chief justice of the newly conquered territory, dubbed ‘New Spain of the Ocean Sea’.” As governor, Cortés demolished the pyramids and temples of the Aztec Empire, “rebuilding on the Aztec ruins of Tenochtitlán to create the “most important European city in the Americas.”
Mexico City was not the only Spanish city Cortés founded, the entry relates he “appointed men to extend Spanish rule to all of New Spain.” Of course as a Catholic, Cortés “supported efforts to evangelize the indigenous people to Christianity and sponsored new explorations.” Although Cortés “spent the next seven years establishing peace among the Indians of Mexico and developing mines and farmlands”, Cortés never became an agent for the “Light.” This is because he introduced the heinous practice of slavery into the Americas. In fact, he was “one of the first to import African slaves to early colonial Mexico” and was said to have owned “at least 200 slaves.”
A year after Hernán Cortés claimed Central America for Spain; another Spanish conquistador turned his sights on South America. The name of this Spanish conquistador was Francisco Pizarro.


The Spanish conquest of South America was not as easy as that of Central America. According to his entry on Wikipedia, it was while in Panama in 1522 that Pizarro heard rumors of “a great land to the south rich with gold.” Eager to seek fame and glory as Hernán Cortés had done in “New Spain” or Mexico, Pizarro embarked on “a new series of expeditions to the south in search of the riches of the Incan Empire.”
A “partnership” in 1524 between Pizarro, a Catholic “priest Hernando de Luque, and a soldier, Diego de Almagro was formed “to explore and conquer the south.” This first expedition left Panama “On 13 September 1524” with a small contingent of men. The expedition to South America was a non starter as due to “bad weather, lack of food, and skirmishes with hostile natives” the conquistadors were forced to return to Panama.
Two years later, the trio again attempted to reach South America. This time the expedition reached the northern shore of the continent, the country of Ecuador, by way of Columbia. The entry relates that “In August 1526…Pizarro left Panama with two ships with 160 men and several horses, reaching as far as the Colombian San Juan River.” Evidently, the expedition divided with “Pizarro staying to explore the new and often perilous territory off the swampy Colombian coasts, while the expedition’s second-in-command, Almagro, was sent back to Panama for reinforcements…” A third division led by “Pizarro’s Piloto Mayor (main pilot), Bartolomé Ruiz, continued sailing south and, after crossing the equator, found and captured a balsa (raft) of natives from Tumbes who were supervising the area.” As the Tumbe’s raft was loaded with “pieces of gold, silver, and emeralds” Ruiz’s “expedition” became “the central focus of this second expedition.” Ruiz not only took the riches from the Tumbe’s raft, but he kidnapped “some of the natives…to serve later as interpreters.” Then with the captives and booty, Ruiz headed north to rejoin Pizarro. Meanwhile, Pizarro had encountered “serious difficulties” in “exploring the new territory.”
The two divisions of the second expedition were soon joined by the third; Almagro, who arrived “laden with supplies, and a considerable reinforcement of at least eighty recruited men.” With the reinforcements, Pizarro decided to check out the territory that Ruiz had discovered for himself. However, after a “difficult voyage due to strong winds and currents”, when Pizarro arrived at “Atacames in the Ecuadorian coast” he was greeted by a “very large native population recently brought under Inca rule.” The natives of Ecuador demonstrated such a “warlike spirit” and “seemed so defiant and dangerous in numbers that the Spanish decided not to enter the land.”
Pizzaro’s, third attempt very nearly did not get off the ground, because “the new governor of Panama, Pedro de los Rios…refused to allow for a third expedition to the south.” It was the Holy Roman Emperor Charles (V) that facilitated the third expedition to South America when supporters of Pizarro arranged for him to return to Spain to request permission from the emperor “in person.” Pizarro left Panama “in the spring of 1528,” and arrived in “Seville in early summer.” In Toledo, Pizarro made his case with the emperor, relating that the Incan Empire was “a territory…very rich in gold and silver which he and his followers had bravely explored ‘to extend the empire of Castile’.”
Although King Charles agreed to support the third expedition to South America, it was Queen Isabella that signed the licensed “document which authorized Francisco Pizarro to proceed with the conquest of Peru.” Because the Spanish Inquisition authorization by Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand was discussed at length in the previous “upsteppings,” the appearance of the name Queen Isabella made me curious of the identity of this Queen Isabella. I learned from her entry on Wikipedia that her full title was Isabella of Portugal and that she was the Spanish queen consort and Holy Roman Empress. The entry explains:

Isabella of Portugal (24 October 1503 – 1 May 1539) …By her marriage to Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, Isabella was also Holy Roman Empress and Queen consort of Aragon and Castile. She served as the regent of Spain during the absence of her spouse for long periods.

Again to cut a long story short, as the saying goes “third time is the charm” and Pizarro arrived in the land of the Incas. He “established the first Spanish settlement in Peru…in July 1532. At the time Peru was ruled by the Inca Emperor Atahualpa. According to his entry on Wikipedia, “Atahualpa…became emperor upon defeating his older half-brother Huáscar in a civil war sparked by the death of their father, Inca Huayna Capac, from an infectious disease thought to be smallpox.” The entry for Atahualpa contains the basic information for us to get a pretty good idea of the Inca Empire during the 16th century when Pizarro arrived in Peru:

By the mid 1520s, the Inca Empire was ruled by Huayna Capac who for several years had waged war on the northern frontiers of the Empire, in what is now northern Ecuador and southern Colombia… Huayna Capac was succeeded as Sapa Inca by his son Huascar, who was crowned in the Inca capital of Cusco; meanwhile, his brother Atahualpa was left in charge of the Inca army in the north probably as provincial governor on behalf of his brother. According to chroniclers, Huayna Capac divided the empire in two: the northern part, ruled from Quito, and the southern from Cusco. After a few years of peace, civil war broke out between the brothers but its causes remain unclear as different chronicles give different accounts…
The final battle took place at Quipaipan, where Huáscar was captured and his army disbanded. Atahualpa had stopped in the city of Cajamarca in the Andes with his army of 80,000 troops on his way south to Cusco to claim his throne when he encountered the Spanish led by Pizarro.

Like so many other times in history, whenever there is conflict within an empire, outsiders gain the advantage. This was never so true than in the Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire. When Pizarro landed in Ecuador in January 1331 with “180 men and 37 horses” they first “occupied Tumbes” and learned of the “civil war between Huascar and Atahualpa.” At Tumbes, Pizzaro “founded the city of San Miguel de Piura in September 1532 and then marched towards the heart of the Inca Empire.” On learning of the Spaniards, Atahualpa “sent an Inca noble to investigate them.” The envoy “stayed for two days in the Spanish camp, studied the weapons and horses, and delivered an invitation to visit Cajamarca to meet Atahualpa.” As the Spanish army consisted of less than two hundred men “Atahualpa did not consider the small Spanish force as a threat so he let them march to his encounter to capture them personally; thus, Pizarro and his men advanced unopposed through some very difficult terrain, arriving to Cajamarca on November 15, 1532.”
As history has recorded the Inca emperor had made a fatal error in underestimating Pizarro. In allowing the Spaniards to enter and occupy Cajamarca, the Incas had metaphorically allowed the “wolf” into the sheep-pen. While the Spaniards were in Cajamarca, “Atahualpa and his army had camped on a hill close to Cajamarca.” When Pizarro “sent an embassy to the Inca,” an invitation “to visit Cajamarca to meet Francisco Pizarro” was extended to the Inca emperor. Unsuspecting, Atahualpa agreed to visit the next day, giving Pizarro time to prepare “an ambush to trap the Inca.” The next day “Atahualpa entered the town late in the afternoon in a litter carried by eighty lords; with him there were four other lords in litters and hammocks and five or six thousand men carrying small battle axes, slings and pouches of stones underneath their clothes.”
This was a pretty imposing force, but there were “no Spaniards in the plaza as they were all inside the buildings.” Seeming to be nonthreatening, the “Dominican friar Vincente de Valverde” emerged into the plaza “with an interpreter.” After Atahualpa refused the friar’s invitation “to come inside to talk and dine with Pizarro”, the Inca emperor “demanded the return of every single thing the Spaniards had taken since they landed.” Instead of giving the Incas the booty the Spaniards had plundered since landing in South America, the friar handed over his “breviary.”
I had absolutely no idea what a breviary is so I looked it up and learned that it is a small “liturgical book of the Latin liturgical rites of the Catholic Church containing the public or canonical prayers, hymns, the Psalms, readings, and notations for everyday use.” Obviously, Atahualpa was not pleased and “after a brief examination the Inca threw it to the ground.” Whereupon the “holy man” sprung the trap for the Inca. “According to eyewitness accounts…Valverde then hurried back towards Pizarro, calling on the Spaniards to attack. At that moment, Pizarro gave the signal to attack; the Spanish infantry and cavalry came out of their hiding places and charged the unsuspecting Inca army, killing a great number while the rest fled in panic. Francisco Pizarro led the attack on Atahualpa but only managed to capture him after killing all those carrying him and turning over his litter.”
After their successful ambush of the Inca, the Spaniards raided the “Inca army camp in which they found great quantities of gold, silver and emeralds.” Observing the Spaniard’s desire for treasure, “Atahualpa…offered to fill a large room about 6.7 meters long and 5.17 meters wide up to a height of 2.45 meters once with gold and twice with silver within two months.”
Whether the Incas were able to make good on their promise, the entry does not say. However, it did not save the Inca emperor. The entry relates the shameful events carried out by the conquistadors and their religious advisor:

After several months the Spanish saw Atahualpa as too much of a liability and chose to have him executed. Pizarro staged a mock trial and found Atahualpa guilty of revolting against the Spanish, practicing idolatry and murdering Huáscar, his own brother. Atahualpa was sentenced to execution by burning. He was horrified, since the Inca believed that the soul would not be able to go on to the afterlife if the body were burned. Friar Vicente de Valverde, who had earlier offered the Bible to Atahualpa, intervened again, telling Atahualpa that if he agreed to convert to Catholicism he would convince the rest to commute the sentence. Atahualpa agreed to be baptized into the Catholic faith. He was given the name Juan Santos Atahualpa and, in accordance with his request, was strangled with a garrote instead of being burned. Atahualpa was succeeded by his brother, the puppet Inca Túpac Huallpa, and later by another brother Manco Inca.

The heart of the Inca Empire, Cusco fell to Pizarro in 1533, however “Jauja in the fertile Mantaro Valley was established as Peru’s provisional capital in April 1534. Moreover, as both Cusco and Jauja were too “far from the sea to serve as the Spanish capital of Peru,” Pizzaro “founded the city of Lima in Peru’s central coast on 18 January 1535.”
Although the Spanish did not consider Cuzco as the rightful center of Peru, the Inca did and consequently made several attempts to re-conquer the city from the Spanish. Unfortunately, their attempts were to no avail and they were finally “defeated by Almagro” one of the original three partners on the expeditions to South America. As a partner Almagro argued with Pizarro and his brothers over “respecting the limits of their jurisdiction” going so far as to go to war with them. As Pizarro was the governor of Peru, when Almagro lost the “war” at “the Battle of Las Salinas (1538)”, he had Almagro “executed.” Adding insult to injury, “Almagro’s son…was later stripped of his lands and left bankrupt by Pizarro.”
Clearly demonstrating the influence of the “Shadow”, after conquering the Inca Empire, “the new Spanish rulers brutally oppressed the people and suppressed their traditions.” Because of the conquistador’s insatiable greed for gold “The Spaniards used the Inca mita (mandatory public service) system to literally work the people to death.” Unfortunately, work was not the main killer of the survivors of the Inca Empire. The entry relates that:

The effects of smallpox on the Inca Empire were even more devastating. Beginning in Colombia, smallpox spread rapidly before the Spanish invaders first arrived in the empire. The spread was probably aided by the efficient Inca road system. Within a few years smallpox claimed between 60% and 94% of the Inca population, with other waves of European disease weakening them further. Smallpox was only the first epidemic. Typhus (probably) in 1546, influenza and smallpox together in 1558, smallpox again in 1589, diphtheria in 1614, measles in 1618 - all ravaged the remains of Inca culture.

The mention of the outbreak of smallpox and other diseases that devastated the Inca Empire reminded me of the outbreak of the Black Death in Europe in the 14th century. As stated, whenever, the situation deteriorates to the point that spiritual progress is not only stopped, but begins to regress, the Collective Soul in the form of the mass consciousness will facilitate large numbers of individuals to leave that present incarnation by causing the outbreak of deadly diseases, where only a small percentage survive. This was the case in the Americas after the Spanish conquest. We see this not only in the demise of the Incan Empire, but also in the fall of the Aztec Empire. According to their entry, on the “eve of the Spanish Conquest”, which began in 1520-1521 “an outbreak of smallpox” decimated the inhabitants “of Tenochtitlán and was instrumental “in the fall of the city.” I use the term decimate deliberately, because at least one in ten, and as many as one in two members of the population succumbed “to this epidemic.”
According to the entry for the Cortés, “the Valley of Mexico was hit with two more epidemics, smallpox (1545-1548) and typhus (1576-1581).” Evidently, the population was so decimated that the “The Spaniards, to consolidate the diminishing population, merged the survivors from small towns in the Valley of Mexico into bigger ones.” Ultimately, historians estimate that these outbreaks during the 16th century reduced “the indigenous population of the Valley of Mexico…by more than 80% in the course of about 60 years.”

It would appear that the “Shadow” had completely conquered Central and South America in the 16th century and from a secular perspective “he” had. However, the “Light” had established sanctuaries or repositories of The Mysteries in the many ancient buildings of the Americas. Consequently, when the “Shadow” overwhelmed the “Light” in the New World during the 16th century and forced Sophia to withdraw from the region, the area still retained the “Light” in its sacred pyramids and temples. This was ensured when the Mayans of Palenque abandoned their city to be reclaimed by the Yucatan Peninsula jungle.
I mentioned earlier how the “Light” benefited from the vision that led the Aztecs to build their capital on an island in Lake Texcoco because it preserved the ancient city of Teotihuacan. A similar situation occurred in South America, when the Incas were inspired by the “Light” to abandon Machu Picchu, before the Spaniards could discover it. Again this preserved the city for future discovers.


In the previous “upstepping” I related that after 1525 Sophia and What-has-been-Willed descended to the earth plane to begin their reconnection as every relationship a male and a female can have. Moreover, that Melchizedek began incarnating as members of the “Orders of the Quest.” Nonetheless, as I said because only a small portion of their consciousness was in the Earth plane all three were able to help the representatives of the “Light.” However, the change was especially significant to Sophia and the Divine Feminine, because of Sophia’s connection to The Holy Spirit, which I discussed in Spiritual Evolution Part Two. The connection concerns the non-Sephirot Daath, which came into plane in the earth plane because of the pathway between the Tree of Reason and the Tree of Truth. To recap:

“…it is associating Daath with both The Holy Spirit and The Holy Ghost that reveals an even deeper meaning. In Spiritual Evolution, The Holy Spirit becomes The Holy Ghost when we begin to activate the Spark of God within through the agency of the three levels of the Higher Self. We do this through Divine Wisdom or the purified High Priestess. The Tarot reflects this in its union of The High Priestess with The Empress. In other words, it is the union of the highest aspect of Sophia, The High Priestess with The Holy Spirit, Daath or the highest aspect of The Empress that becomes The Holy Ghost…

“The conclusion I was led to was on the higher plane Daath represents The Empress as the Holy Spirit, which is within each heart waiting to be activated. Conversely, on the physical and ethereal plane, Daath represents The High Priestess as the Holy Ghost, which can be experienced in the physical world. Either way, Daath is connected to the Christ, Holy Spirit and Sophia, all of which lay dormant within every human being, with the potential to be activated.”

What this means is because of the shift in consciousness in 1525; the Divine Feminine divided herself into three distinct parts. Two of these parts were of the Macrocosmic aspect, which operated on the Spiritual Planes as The Holy Spirit and The Holy Ghost that bridges the Soul Plane and the Earth Plane. The third aspect of the Divine Feminine was Sophia, which (a minute part) incarnated on earth with (a minute part) of her partner What-has-been-Willed. The main result of this division was the ability of The Holy Spirit/Ghost to interact in the Earth Plane as in the form of Guan Yin with the Dalai Lamas. Another way this is demonstrated is in the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe. We learned of this mysterious figure on our trip to Mexico in 2000, which we reported in our third book The True Philosophers’ Stone (TPS).

“There is a fascinating legend surrounding the church concerning a member of an indigenous tribe to the area. Briefly, the tribal member, while traveling through the forest one day was accosted by a mysterious female who informed him that she was the Virgin Mary. She instructed him to go to the local bishop and tell the bishop that he had spoken to the Virgin Mary. “Obviously” as he was not Christian, he was not believed. Thinking that he had carried out the Lady’s instructions and that his part was over, he went about his life. A few days later, he is again stopped by the mysterious figure. Defending himself, he explains that the bishop did not believe him. Instructing him to return to the Bishop, she tells the man to hold out the apron that he is wearing, whereupon she proceeds to throw red roses into it. Reluctantly the native does as she instructs, however, when he unfurls his apron to give the bishop the roses, all present discover that instead of roses there is a superimposed perfect portrait of the mysterious woman.
“Naturally a church is erected on the site where the tribesman said the woman appeared to house the “sacred icon.” The original church had been closed for 30 years due to severe structural damage and a splendid grandiose new church had been built below it. Surprisingly, though their guide proudly informed the passengers “Just three days ago, they reopened the original church, and that is where we will visit first.”
“Situated high above the city, the church is only accessible by climbing several hundred steps. At the top they filed into the magnificent building. Although neither Craig nor Suzzan endorse either Catholicism or Mariolatry, they could not help but be affected by the energy of the building. The “icon” wasn’t there, but it didn’t matter. There was a sense of spiritual wonder as they gazed at the beautiful paintings and ornate architecture.
“Just 30 minutes later, they were in the new home for the “apron.” This was a very different building to the serene beauty of its predecessor…
“Craig and Suzzan could not help thinking that if the “cloth” was supposed to be what heals people then they didn’t feel it. If the “icon” had been housed in its original home, with the incredible energy, then they would give it some consideration. Instead, the new church felt as empty as when they had stood in the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, the purported place of Jesus’ birth.”

The relevance of our experience in the Church of Our Lady of Guadalupe escaped us until I was writing this thesis. Considering that Mexico City was built over the capital of the Aztecs, which was the site of multiple blood sacrifices, I could understand the “Light” acting to inspire building a church elsewhere. In the above excerpt, we reported that in the original church, Craig and I were struck with “a sense of spiritual wonder”, which suggests that there was an energy connected to the church that surpassed the religious icon of the “apron.” When we remember the practice of building sacred buildings over Earth Stars, we can begin to see the reason for the apparition. Although in the book we related our conclusion was that the church retained the energy of the prayers of praise, there is another aspect to consider. As stated, during the 16th century, because the “Shadow” overwhelmed the “Light” in the Americas Sophia had been forced to withdraw. Nonetheless, because of the shift in 1525, The Divine Feminine was able to cause the apparition in 1531, which caused a magnificent church to be built over an Earth Star to hold the “Light” in a dormant state until such time as it could be reactivated.
We discovered similar examples of the “Light” being held in a dormant state in South America, which we visited that fall. Again we recorded our experiences and discoveries in our third book TPS:

“As the car wound its way around precipitous bends down to Ollantaytambo, Dagma explained about the regions history to Craig and Suzzan. She kept repeating, what sounded like, ‘Widacocha.’ It took a little while for Suzzan to realize that she was referring to the ‘Christ-like’ figure of Viracocha…the teacher of the South American continent.
“Dagma told Craig and Suzzan of an ancient temple that historians have wrongly attributed to the Incas. ‘Look up there,’ Dagma instructed, pointing to what appeared to be a huge face carved into the side of the mountain. ‘That’s believed to be Viracocha…The area around Ollantaytambo is referred to as the Sacred Valley because the Sacred River, Rio Vilcanota runs through the middle of the town. However, the most imposing thing that Craig and Suzzan found about the area was the megalithic ruins that loom over the town…
“Ascending the stone steps to the Sun Temple at the top of the ruins, it became necessary for them to remove their jackets and by the time they reached the summit, they were all perspiring. The view from the top was well worth the climb. Displayed beneath them in panoramic splendor was the whole town with the River flowing through it and the surrounding fields.
“Aimlessly wandering over the site, Suzzan found herself in what appeared to have been a small room. All around her were large blocks of stone in disarray. Still it was obvious to her, that this had been a very special place. ‘I feel like I’m in the presence of great wisdom,’ Suzzan suddenly blurted out.
“Suzzan was as equally surprised by her statement, as the two men were. Nodding his head, Alan stated, ‘Yes. This was a very sacred site. The archaeologists are completely wrong when they say that this was an Inca fort. To me, anyone could see that the ruins resembled a temple of worship rather than a military stronghold.’
“A little way from the ‘room’ there was a wall of six massive blocks of stone freestanding in a sort of open area. Mark Amaru Pinkham in his book The Return of the Serpents of Wisdom1 links the ruins to a ‘network of spiritual adepts known as the solar all great white brotherhood.’2
“Pinkham says of the ruins that, ‘In the construction of this glorious temple of light, the function of which appears to have been that of an initiation temple for the opening of the heart chakra,’ extraterrestrial beings, such as Venusians ‘...left their signature at the site as a stair step motif of five ‘steps’, which can still be seen, engraved upon the only surviving wall of the ancient temple.’ He explains that the ‘wall’ is compiled of six adjoining ‘megalithic stone panels.’ Interestingly, Pinkham reminds us that the number six is also the number of points in a “six-pointed star, the symbol of polarity union.’ He continues, ‘The six panels points to the temple’s function as an initiation temple which was designed for both polarity union and the awakening of the androgynous consciousness existing within the human heart chakra.”3

Although we may never know who built the megalithic ruins at Ollantaytambo, from the purpose for the site, I am sure they were connected with the “Light.” We discovered more evidence of these megalithic builders above Cusco. As we reported:

“They had climbed to a particularly high point, when Craig pointed to a very intricate design in a large section of rock directly below them. ‘It looks like a computer panel,’ commented Craig. Running all the possibilities through his mind, he added, ‘It almost looks like something fits into it.’ Walking down the road, to the main reason they were up there, the three of them mused over what Q’enko really was.
“Reaching a summit of a small incline, Craig and Suzzan were afforded their first view of the remarkable ruins of Sacsayhuaman. Pinkham says of the site that an ancient society, which he refers to as ‘dragons’ erected ‘buildings,’ which were linked by ‘dragon lines and arranged in the shape of a gigantic Puma.’ This he says symbolizes ‘the fiery explosive energy, which emanated out of the Cusco vortex.’ At the puma’s ‘head’ they erected a ‘megalithic temple....’ He continues, ‘Sacsayhuaman or Sacahuma was a hill temple comprised of three rows of gigantic blocks placed in a zigzag pattern.’ According to Pinkham it symbolized the teeth of the puma. The gigantic rocks, zigzag pattern in which a number weighed up to one hundred tons, denoted ‘the path taken by the dragon current as it traveled across the Sacahuma vortex.’4
“Standing at the top of the rise the sheer size of Sacsayhuaman was staggering. ‘The ‘experts’ say that this is an Incan fort,” commented Alan, breaking into Craig and Suzzan’s thoughts. ‘However, if you look, you will see that there is a hill behind them that is open. All the enemy had to do was walk around and climb up the grassy slope behind them.’
“While Alan had been speaking, they had been walking towards the site. The nearer they got, the larger the blocks became. Graham Hancock had said in his Fingerprints of the Gods that ‘One of these astonishing pieces of carefully hewn stone had a height of twenty-eight feet and was calculated to weigh 361 tons (roughly the equivalent of five hundred family-sized automobiles)’5

It is important to state that I do not necessarily agree with Mr. Pinkham’s assessment that these megalithic buildings were built by extraterrestrials. However, it is my belief that it really does not matter who built them. It is enough to know that many thousands of years ago, ancient civilizations had the knowledge of how to incorporate energy and frequency into stone structures and oftentimes these incredible structures carried messages through the centuries. This was especially seen in the amazing ancient site of Tiahuanaco:

“Thursday morning Craig, Alan and Suzzan flew to La Paz international airport. During the flight, they had been fortunate enough to see Lake Titicaca, the ‘Lake at the Roof of the World,’ as they flew through its entire length of one hundred and thirty-eight miles. If Craig and Suzzan thought they had a problem with Cusco’s altitude, it was nothing compared to the Lake Titicaca area.
“Quickly hustling Craig and Suzzan into a waiting taxi, they headed down to the city. Locating their hotel, Alan checked them all in. ‘We will have to hurry, as the only time we can go to Tiahuanaco is this afternoon…’
“They arrived at the ancient ruins of Tiahuanaco with only thirty minutes to locate the gate and perform the ceremony as the site was due to close at 5 PM. The first thing the couple noticed was how spread out the ruins was…As time was of the essence, they looked around to locate the gateway. Alas it was nowhere in the immediate vicinity. ‘Where is the gateway, Alan?’ asked Craig.
“‘Oh, I don’t know. Over there somewhere, I think,’ he replied, pointing to a structure in the distance. ‘I’m going to check out the big boys over there,’ he added heading in the opposite direction. At that, Craig and Suzzan took off at a run for their quarry…
“Nearing the gateway that Alan had directed them to, Suzzan noticed that it was different from the pictures of the ‘Gateway to the Sun.’ First, it wasn’t as ornate with just a simple design of three faces. Whereas in Hancock’s book, plates thirteen and fourteen of the ‘Gateway’ have an intricate design referred to as the ‘calendar frieze,’ on one side, with elaborate cutouts on the other.6 Second this gate was oriented north and south, as opposed to East and West, as shown in the above-mentioned plates…
“Catching up with Alan again, Craig and Suzzan told him of the two gateways. “Oh! You must have been at the ‘Gateway to the Moon’ instead!’ On the way home from Tiahuanaco, Suzzan was lost in thought considering what had happened. The Author of The Book of Knowledge: The Keys of Enoch7 says that Tiahuanaco was referred to as ‘the city of the Lords of Light.’ Evidently it was initially ‘built at sea level during a previous cycle and heaved up to its present altitude of 13,000 feet.’ He explains that the original city “contains the gate threshold” which recounts that Melchizedek would come again ‘at the end of this cycle of time and open the Treasury of Tiahuanaco.’8
“This was interesting because although the above information came from a metaphysical source, the mystery of Tiahuanaco has caused many heated debates between different members of the accredited archaeological community. Craig and Suzzan had discovered early in their research that Graham Hancock questioned the conventional dating of Tiahuanaco of 500 C.E. He points out that there is ‘irrefutable evidence that -- the city of Tiahuanaco was once a port, complete with extensive docks, positioned right on the shore of Lake Titicaca…’9
“Logically, Hancock points out that it would have taken considerably longer than 1500 years for the earth’s natural forces to alter the land so drastically. As with other ancient cultures, there was a Christ-like figure associated with Tiahuanaco that taught the people. This one’s name was Thunupa. However, the description of this “great teacher” is so similar to Viracocha and Quetzalcoatl as to make him appear to be their twin…

We found two more sacred sites in Bolivia, South America; only these appeared to be natural. Both of the sites were located on Lake Titicaca:

“Winding their way up precipitous mountain roads, the view was truly awesome. Soon the coach began descending again. In the distance, they could see the small tourist destination of Copacabana. The reason the town had become so popular was because it was the jumping off point for the “Island of the Sun” and the “Island of the Moon.” These two islands were also Craig and Suzzan’s next ports of call so to speak.
“The next morning Craig and Alan hired a small boat for the day and headed for the island. Three hours later, the boat dropped anchor alongside, what appeared to Suzzan to be a sheer cliff. At her horrified expression Alan explained, ‘I’ve decided to approach the ‘Sacred Rock’ from this side as it is quicker. It’s just at the top of this cliff. It’s a little difficult, but I think you can make it. Okay?’ At that he leapt from the boat on to the base of the cliff…
“By the time they reached the top, Suzzan was gasping for air and even Craig needed to catch his breath. Alan waited patiently for them to regain their strength before leading them over to the ‘Sacred Rock.’
On the way to the island Alan had explained, “The Sacred Rock has a very powerful legend. The locals believe that during a great catastrophe, the sun and moon ‘hung out here,’ before being reborn again into the sky…’
“Before returning to Copacabana, they wanted to visit the “Island of the Sun’s” counterpart, “The Island of the Moon.” Approaching the island, both Craig and Suzzan was struck by how much the shape of the island resembled a pregnant woman on her back. Mooring at a small jetty, they all went ashore…
“The Temple of the Priestesses,’ is situated on the top of a cliff…Although there were several buildings on the site, neither Craig nor Suzzan felt inclined to explore them. Instead, they found a small stone ledge to sit on. Deciding that the energy they were feeling was more about the ground itself, rather than the crumbled down buildings, they acknowledged the power and serenity of the island in prayer. Opening her eyes to the deafening quiet calm and warm sunlight Suzzan stared stunned at the vision before her. Simulating the action of a rising chest, the grassy hilltop rose and fell several times, as if it was actually breathing. Everything was surrealistically still, nothing else was moving and no sounds could be heard, turning to Craig to draw his attention, she realized by the expression on his face that he had seen the same thing…
“On the boat heading back to Copacabana, Craig and Suzzan were shown what had happened at both of the islands. God explained, ‘The Island of the Sun is the representative of the masculine energy, whereas the island of the Moon represents the feminine…’

As powerful an experience as we had on the Island of the Sun and the Island of the Moon, our main destination was Machu Picchu in Peru. The excerpt from TPS explains:

“There were only two areas of Machu Picchu that Suzzan had heard of -- namely ‘The Gateway to the Sun’ and the ‘Hitching Post to the Sun.’ Joining the crowds of people milling around the parking lot, they made their way to the turnstile gate entrance. Moved along by the continuous stream of tourists, they followed that stream up several flights of stone steps.
“Walking along a narrow walkway Craig and Suzzan passed under an archway. Suzzan stopped in her tracks, staring in awe at the scene spread out before them. Off to the left, was the site that is euphemistically called by archaeologists ‘The Quarry.’ It is an amazing place with huge megalithic stones lying around as if some giant hand had just tossed them there. Moving deeper into the Quarry, Suzzan felt incredible energy…
“Descending down steep steps to the area below them, they entered into the Central Plaza, which contains the Main Temple and the Temple of the Three Windows.
Lying down in the middle of the Plaza was a stone that looked exactly like the one in Suzzan’s vision. Nonetheless, she was urged onward and found herself in a small area to the side and behind both the Main Temple and the Temple of the Three Windows. There was a grassy ledge there, with a wall facing outwards…
“Finding a large square stone at the top of the Quarry, Suzzan faced east. As she did this, the Sun burst through the clouds. Although there were literally dozens of people in the site, at that moment Craig and Suzzan were totally alone…
…Leaving the Quarry, they sought out the next sacred site. That site, as previously stated was between the Main Temple and the Temple of the Three Windows. When Craig and Suzzan arrived in the Main Plaza, they found it literally packed with tourists. However, again like their experience at the Quarry, when Suzzan moved into position there was not a soul in the immediate vicinity.
“The final site was deserted at first and raising her hand, Suzzan had begun to recite the words. She was on the second direction, when three people walked into the passage they were in. Immediately, she hesitated, but Craig told her to continue. With the final words…both Craig and Suzzan felt an incredible lifting. It was as if the whole site had been holding its breath and suddenly exhaled.
“Afterwards, they went in search of the Temple of the Moon. Walking along the narrow paths, they came across a huge megalithic stone. Suzzan was compelled to place her hands on it and release the energy back to the Father. Following some mysterious preordained path that appeared to be pointed out by seven lizards, Suzzan performed the strange releasing ceremony several times. On several occasions, she asked Craig to touch the stone too…
Late afternoon, the next day they left for Cusco. As the train trundled its way through the Sacred Valley, Suzzan thought of Alan’s statement about the shift in energy. Mr. Pinkham has quite a lot to say about Machu Picchu in his The Return of the Serpents of Wisdom. For instance, he says that it is ‘Sometimes referred to by the local shamen as the ‘Crystal City’ because of the high concentration of resonating quartz crystal within its granite blocks. This unique feature, as well as its lofty geographical location, may have promoted the megalith’s function as a receiving/transmitting station for both planetary and extraterrestrial communication.’10

As I said, our guide had told us that the previous year the Dalai lama had come to Machu Picchu. To reiterate, Alan told us the Dalai lama had come to Machu Picchu because he had been told that the spiritual energy had shifted from the eastern hemisphere to Machu Picchu. I will not discuss our eventual understanding for the trips to Mexico, Peru, and Bolivia here; suffice to say it involved the sanctuaries of the “Light” and our mission.
Although the “Shadow” overwhelmed the “Light” in Central and South America with the Spanish conquest during the 16th century, North America remained untainted by the “Shadow” until the 18th century. In fact, the “Light” was successful in grounding The Mysteries into the very foundation of the United States. However, before I leave the Americas for now, I do want to discuss the religious order that accompanied the Spanish Conquistadors.


To be honest, I was not sure as to which side had instigated the formation of the Jesuits, because there were aspects of their mission, which promoted the agenda of the “Light.” Yet as a Catholic order that forcibly converted indigenous tribes to Catholicism they obviously perpetuated the corruption of Christianity.

Before I discuss the Jesuits, I need to clarify an important point. Although I was Christened and Confirmed in the Church of England, I no longer consider myself an Anglican Christian; consequently I am not saying that the Protestant Church is correct. My investigation has led me to conclude that there is no Christian Church exclusively teaching Jesus’ message. Obviously, they all have some of the Truth, but because it is mixed together with false doctrine infused by the “Shadow”, it is up to each individual to sift the gold from the dross, which is exactly what Craig and I have been doing for sixteen years.

The order of the Jesuits is the perfect example of reflecting both the “Light” and the “Shadow’s” agendas. Let us first examine how this mysterious order came to be. Once again I turn to Wikipedia for the historical facts. The entry for the Jesuits reports that they “were founded just before the Counter-Reformation” by a Spaniard from the Basque region of Spain called Ignatius of Loyola. The entry explains that the Jesuit’s “contributions to the late Renaissance were significant in their roles both as a missionary order and as the first religious order to operate colleges and universities as a principal and distinct ministry.” The mention of the “missionary order”, reminded me that in the Americas, the Jesuits were responsible for converting the indigenous peoples to Catholicism. In doing this, the culture and religion of the region was lost, which obviously played into the “Shadow’s” agenda. Nonetheless, the Jesuits were according to the entry “the only force standing between the Native Americans and slavery.” The entry continues:

Together throughout South America but especially in present-day Brazil and Paraguay they formed Christian Native American city-states, called "reductions" (Spanish Reducciones, Portuguese Reduções). These were societies set up according to an idealized theocratic model. It is partly because the Jesuits, such as Antonio Ruiz de Montoya, protected the natives (whom certain Spanish and Portuguese colonizers wanted to enslave) that the Society of Jesus was suppressed.

Obviously opposing slavery promotes the “Light’s” agenda, but the main activity of the Jesuits that represented the “Light’s” agenda was in education. The entry relates that “By the time of Ignatius’ death in 1556, the Jesuits were already operating a network of 74 colleges on three continents. A precursor to liberal education, the Jesuit plan of studies incorporated the Classical teachings of Renaissance humanism into the Scholastic structure of Catholic thought.”
The presence of the “Shadow’s” influence on the Jesuit order’s mission is seen in their “second and third goals.” The first to establish “schools throughout Europe” with the Jesuit “teachers” being “rigorously trained in both classical studies and theology” could be used for the benefit of both sides. However, the second goal to “convert non-Christians to Catholicism” and the third goal to “stop Protestantism from spreading” were opposed to the freedom of religion that was sacrosanct to the “Light.”
Nonetheless, the Jesuits were responsible for teaching thousands of illiterate people how to read and write and whether this led to converts to Catholicism or not, it still introduced the knowledge of Jesus’ teachings. I was interested to learn the Jesuits taught that “God can be encountered through created things and especially art.” Evidently, because of this belief “…many early Jesuits distinguished themselves in the visual and performing arts as well as in music.”
The Jesuit missionaries reached every corner of the world, including Japan, Africa, India, Tibet, and China. Interestingly, it was in China that the Jesuits best represented the “Light’s” agenda. The entry relates:

The Jesuit China missions of the 16th and 17th centuries introduced Western science and astronomy, then undergoing its own revolution, to China. The Society of Jesus introduced, according to Thomas Woods, ‘a substantial body of scientific knowledge and a vast array of mental tools for understanding the physical universe, including the Euclidean geometry that made planetary motion comprehensible.’ Another expert quoted by Woods said the scientific revolution brought by the Jesuits coincided with a time when science was at a very low level in China:
[The Jesuits] made efforts to translate western mathematical and astronomical works into Chinese and aroused the interest of Chinese scholars in these sciences. They made very extensive astronomical observation and carried out the first modern cartographic work in China. They also learned to appreciate the scientific achievements of this ancient culture and made them known in Europe. Through their correspondence European scientists first learned about the Chinese science and culture…
Conversely, the Jesuits were very active in transmitting Chinese knowledge to Europe. Confucius’s works were translated into European languages through the agency of Jesuit scholars stationed in China.

In mentioning that Confucianism was “transmitted” to Europe, brings me to the most influential leader during the 16th century, Queen Elizabeth (I) of England. To reiterate what was said earlier about Queen Elizabeth perfectly demonstrating cross-gender reincarnations: Although she was a powerful woman in the incarnation of the 16th Century, in her previous incarnation she had been a man.


As stated, Princess Elizabeth was crowned Queen of England on January 15th 1559 at Westminster Abbey. However, I was surprised to learn from the queen’s Wikipedia entry that she was “anointed by the Catholic bishop of Carlisle.” I am not going to dwell on the ins and outs of Elizabeth’s reign from a political standpoint; instead I want to focus on the instances that show which side was influencing her and her “advisors.” Elizabeth’s speech declaring her “intentions to her Council and other peers” reproduced in the entry, gives us an illuminating glimpse into the young queen’s state of consciousness:

My lords, the law of nature moves me to sorrow for my sister; the burden that is fallen upon me makes me amazed, and yet, considering I am God's creature, ordained to obey His appointment, I will thereto yield, desiring from the bottom of my heart that I may have assistance of His grace to be the minister of His heavenly will in this office now committed to me. And as I am but one body naturally considered, though by His permission a body politic to govern, so shall I desire you be assistant to me, that I with my ruling and you with your service may make a good account to Almighty God and leave some comfort to our posterity on earth. I mean to direct all my actions by good advice and counsel.

The entry relates that “Unfortunately for historians, Elizabeth’s personal religious convictions will never be definitely known.” I find this astounding, because her speech clearly states her intention to rule under God’s Will and not her own. Historians however, seem to have concentrated on her struggle to prove her legitimacy as her primary concern.
It is true that the Catholics in England held Elizabeth to be the illegitimate daughter of Henry (VIII) and Anne Boleyn, but the newly formed Church of England had given her legitimacy, by breaking away from the Papal throne. That said, Elizabeth’s “advisors perceived the threat of a Catholic crusade against heretical England.” I say Elizabeth’s “advisors”, because Elizabeth had placed herself under the Grace of God. Nonetheless, because the queen was so young, only twenty-five years of age when she came to the throne, at first she was easily manipulated by those “advisors” who had their own agenda. It is important to state that under Henry (VIII) and his Catholic daughter Mary, both Catholics and “Protestants” were persecuted. From an energetic perspective, this resulted in an atmosphere of conflict that needed to be resolved. Like today, there were extremists on both sides, so as an agent of the “Light” Elizabeth sought a balance between the two. The entry explains how the young queen achieved this:

Elizabeth therefore sought a Protestant solution that would not offend Catholics too greatly while addressing the desires of English Protestants; she would not tolerate the more radical Puritans though, who were pushing for far-reaching reforms. As a result, the parliament of 1559 started to legislate for a church based on the Protestant settlement of Edward VI, with the monarch as its head, but with many superficially Catholic elements, such as priestly vestments.

Queen Elizabeth’s approach received divided reviews. For instance, members in the “House of Commons backed the proposals strongly, but the bill of supremacy met opposition in the House of Lords, particularly from the bishops.” The entry relates that Elizabeth was fortuitous in “that many bishoprics were vacant at the time, including the Archbishopric of Canterbury.” As a consequence of the “bishoprics vacancies” the dissenters in the House of Lords were outvoted by the queen’s advocates. “Nevertheless, Elizabeth was forced to accept the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England rather than the more contentious title of Supreme Head, which many thought unacceptable for a woman to bear.”
I found the reference to Elizabeth being “forced to accept the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England” a little misleading. Her words “…I am God’s creature, ordained to obey His appointment…” demonstrates that Elizabeth believed she ruled by God’s Grace. However, it is important to keep in mind that although Elizabeth was an agent of the “Light”, she was still subject to the influence of her ego and counterfeit spirit. Consequently, you will see the affects of both the guidance of the “Light” and the influence of her ego and counterfeit spirit during her reign. You may have noticed that I did not include the “Shadow’s” influence as a factor in Elizabeth’s decision making; this is because although “he” could influence conditions and situations in her life, “he” could not influence Elizabeth personally. Still, as I said, Elizabeth had to contend with her ego and counterfeit spirit, which could on occasion influence her to act in a less than spiritual way. A perfect example of the dual nature of Elizabeth’s decisions can be seen in the first two acts that became law in Elizabeth I’s reign.
As stated, the Act of Supremacy was more about mollifying both sides of the Catholic and Protestant community. According to the entry the act “became law on 8 May 1559.” Although no “public officials” were exempt from the law and had “to swear an oath of loyalty to the monarch as the supreme governor or risk disqualification from office,” Elizabeth “repealed the heresy laws” in order “to avoid a repeat of the persecution of dissenters practised by Mary.” This was evidence of Elizabeth following the guidance of her Higher Self. An example of Elizabeth being influenced by her ego is found in another act, which became law that same year. The “Act of Uniformity…made attendance at church and the use of an adapted version of the 1552 Book of Common Prayer compulsory.” Again Elizabeth’s Higher Self mitigated this act by making “the penalties for recusancy, or failure to attend and conform…not extreme.”

As the “Light” had such a powerful figure in Queen Elizabeth, the “Shadow” could not ignore her and consequently maneuvered to undermine her popularity with the English people. The first “attack” involved a challenge to her throne by the Catholic Queen in Scotland, namely Mary, Queen of Scots. I related in a previous “upstepping” how Robert (II) of Scotland was the founder of the House of Stewart. Mary was the great, great, great, great, great granddaughter of the first Stewart King of Scotland. Recalling that the House of Stewart was originally from Brittany, France; subsequently the Stewarts were also Normans.
Evidently, Queen Elizabeth was forced to address her Scottish relatives very early on in her reign. Although the rulers of Scotland were Catholic, not all of Scotland’s citizens supported Catholicism. However, with regard to Scotland, Queen Elizabeth’s main concern was “the French presence there.” This generated the fear “that the French planned to invade England and put Mary, Queen of Scots, who was considered by many to be the heir to the English crown, on the throne.”
The reason the French were in Scotland was because Queen Mary was also the Dauphine of France. To explain, after the Scottish king James (V) died in 1542, his only legitimate heir was his daughter Mary, who was only “six days old when her father died.” When Mary was just sixteen years of age the young queen was wed to “Francis, Dauphin of France.” According to the entry for Francis on Wikipedia, the marriage “was arranged by Henry (II) of France in 1548, when Francis was just four years old. Once the marriage agreement had been formally ratified, the now six-year-old Mary was sent to France, to be raised in the royal court until the marriage.”
Francis’ entry relates that “On 24 April 1558, the fourteen-year-old Dauphin was married to the Queen of Scots in a union that would have given the future kings of France the throne of Scotland and also a claim to the throne of England through Mary’s great-grandfather, King Henry (VII) of England.” Interestingly, Francis’ mother was Queen Catherine de Medici, who was the patron of Nostradamus. The fourteen year-old Dauphin succeeded his father Henry (II) in 1559. When Francis married Mary, he became Scotland’s Queen Consort and she became the Queen of France. Tragically, the marriage did not last long, because Mary “was widowed on 5 December 1560.”

Because Elizabeth was the titular head of the Church of England, she was duty bound to support all members of the church. As a result when she learned of Scottish Protestants mounting a rebellion, she “was persuaded to send a force into Scotland to aid the Protestant rebels.” According to the entry this was not a total failure, because although “the campaign was inept, the resulting Treaty of Edinburgh of July 1560 removed the French threat in the north.”
The entry for Mary, Queen of Scots on Wikipedia informs us that the next year after her husband’s death “Mary returned to Scotland in 1561.” At this time Scotland was no longer solely Catholic. It seems that “the country had an established Protestant Church and Scotland was run by a council of Protestant nobles supported by Elizabeth.” Although the “Treaty of Edinburgh” had been signed “Mary refused to ratify the treaty.”
Typical to teenagers rebelling against their elder’s advice, the eighteen year-old queen Mary refused her cousin Elizabeth’s suggestion of a prospective husband, “Robert Dudley” who held out his own hope of becoming the consort of Elizabeth. In defiance, in 1565 Mary married Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, who carried his own claim to the English throne.”
Mary’s choice as Queen’s Consort was “unpopular in Scotland.” The entry relates “The marriage was the first of a series of errors of judgement by Mary that handed the victory to the Scottish Protestants and to Elizabeth.” After the marriage failed, with Darnley’s murder in 1567, Mary put herself under suspicion, by marrying the chief suspect in the crime James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell three months after her husband’s murder.
Mary’s cousin Queen Elizabeth again tried to advise the young queen. In a letter Elizabeth wrote:

How could a worse choice be made for your honour than in such haste to marry such a subject, who besides other and notorious lacks, public fame has charged with the murder of your late husband, besides the touching of yourself also in some part, though we trust in that behalf falsely.

Elizabeth’s warning seems to have been prophetic, because Mary was “imprisoned” by the Scottish lords, who “forced her to abdicate in favour of her son James.” In 1568 Mary “escaped from Loch Leven” and realizing she could not regain her throne without outside help “fled across the border into England.” How Queen Elizabeth handled her headstrong cousin is further evidence of the ambiguous nature of the queen’s influence. As the Queen of England she was surrounded by advisors and these advisors were influenced by both the “Light” and the “Shadow.” The entry demonstrates the struggle, when it reports that “Elizabeth’s first instinct was to restore her fellow monarch; but she and her council instead chose to play safe. Rather than risk returning Mary to Scotland with an English army or sending her to France and the Catholic enemies of England, they detained her in England. She was imprisoned there for the next nineteen years.”
We see the influence of the “Shadow” mainly in the relationship between the two queens. While Mary was held in England she became “the focus for rebellion.” Stirring up division, the “Shadow” influenced “plotters in the Rising of the North” to plot to free Mary. The plot involved “a scheme” that involved her marrying “Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk.” Howard was also a cousin to Queen Elizabeth, which meant he also had a claim to the throne of England. When Elizabeth learned of the plot, she had Howard arrested and imprisoned. When he was later released, he schemed with King Phillip (II) of Spain to place Mary on the throne of England. This treachery caused Elizabeth to have him tried and executed for treason.
Stirring the pot of conflict even more, the “Shadow” instigated Pope Pius to “issue a papal bull in 1570, called Regnans in Excelsis.” This bull declared that Elizabeth was “the pretended Queen of England and the servant of crime.” The bull also declared Elizabeth “to be a heretic and releasing all her subjects from any allegiance.” As this was from the pope, “English Catholics thus had an additional incentive to look to Mary Stuart as the true sovereign of England.”
So now the Catholics of England loyalties were divided; on the one hand they loved their “Virgin Queen” Elizabeth, but on the other hand, their spiritual leader the pope was telling them that Mary was the rightful queen of England. The situation was made worse, by the “Shadow’s” agents, “Francis Walsingham and the royal council” who schemed to bring “a case against” Mary for treason. The entries for both Elizabeth and Mary relates the quandary Elizabeth was in. Starting with the entry for Elizabeth:

At first, Elizabeth resisted calls for Mary’s death. By late 1586 she had been persuaded to sanction her trial and execution on the evidence of letters written during the Babington Plot. Elizabeth’s proclamation of the sentence announced that ‘the said Mary, pretending title to the same Crown, had compassed and imagined within the same realm divers things tending to the hurt, death and destruction of our royal person.’

The entry for Mary goes into great depth of Mary’s trial, but for the purpose of the thesis, the most important part concerns Elizabeth deferring the warrant for her cousin’s execution:

Although Mary had been found guilty and sentenced to death, Elizabeth hesitated to actually order her execution. She was fearful of the consequences, especially if, in revenge, Mary’s son James of Scotland formed an alliance with the Catholic powers, France and Spain, and invaded England. She was also concerned about how this would affect the Divine Right of Kings. Elizabeth did ask Mary’s final custodian, Amias Paulet, if he would contrive some accident to remove Mary. He refused on the grounds that he would not allow such ‘a stain on his posterity.’
She did eventually sign the death warrant and entrusted it to William Davison, a privy councillor. Later…Lord Burghley without Elizabeth’s knowledge, decided to carry out the sentence at once before she could change her mind…
When the news of the execution reached Elizabeth she was extremely indignant, and her wrath was chiefly directed against Davison, who, she asserted, had disobeyed her instructions not to part with the warrant. The secretary was arrested and thrown into the Tower. He was later released, after paying a heavy fine, but his career was ruined.

Some historians have cited the execution of Mary as the cause for the Spanish Armada’s attempted invasion. This brings me to a brief discussion on the impact Queen Elizabeth (I) had on the world during her reign. Her entry relates, “Elizabeth’s foreign policy was largely defensive.” Many historians have criticized Queen Elizabeth as being reluctant to engage in warfare. They cite Sir Walter Rayleigh’s comments after her death about her refusal to listen to the advice of her military advisors:

“If the late queen would have believed her men of war as she did her scribes, we had in her time beaten that great empire in pieces and made their kings of figs and oranges as in old times. But her Majesty did all by halves, and by petty invasions taught the Spaniard how to defend himself, and to see his own weakness.

Although conceding that “some historians have criticised Elizabeth on similar grounds” the entry concludes that “Raleigh’s verdict has more often been judged unfair. Elizabeth had good reason not to place too much trust in her commanders, who once in action tended, as she put it herself, ‘to be transported with an haviour of vainglory’. As a representative of the “Light”, Queen Elizabeth was more interested in making alliances than making war. This is seen in the many treaties she signed with former enemies. For instance, after being drawn into “the disastrous occupation of Le Havre from October 1562 to June 1563, when Elizabeth’s Huguenot allies joined with the Catholics to retake the port…In 1585, she signed the Treaty of Nonsuch with the Dutch to block the Spanish threat to England.”
One of the most difficult periods Queen Elizabeth had to deal with was her relationship with her Catholic “subjects” in Ireland. The entry laments that despite Ireland being a part of Elizabeth’s kingdom and therefore under the English crown “Elizabeth faced a hostile—and in places virtually autonomous—Catholic population that was willing to plot with her enemies.”
Elizabeth’s response to the hostility of Ireland, again demonstrates the struggle within her between her Higher Self and her ego/counterfeit spirit. Not sure what to do in the face of such hostility, Elizabeth deferred Ireland to others. “Her policy there was to grant land to her courtiers and prevent the rebels from giving Spain a base from which to attack England.” These courtiers under the influence of the “Shadow” engendered even more hostility by responding to rebellion in a merciless manner. Some of the tactics used in putting down a rebellion was “burning the land and slaughtering man, woman and child.”
Ireland in the late 16th century was a pretty miserable place to be because in 1582 during a particularly severe famine “an estimated 30,000 Irish people starved to death.” Although the courtiers were unmoved by the plight of the Irish, their queen cautioned their overlords to be merciful. Evidently, “Elizabeth advised her commanders… ‘that rude and barbarous nation’, be well treated; but she showed no remorse when force and bloodshed were deemed necessary.” The first is a clear demonstration of the queen under the direction of her Higher Self, the latter the influence of her ego/counterfeit spirit. Ireland remained a thorn in the side of Queen Elizabeth from 1594 until her death in 1603. The entry relates this trying time:

Between 1594 and 1603, Elizabeth faced her most severe test in Ireland, with the revolt known as Tyrone's Rebellion, or the Nine Years War. Its leader, Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone, was backed by Spain. In spring 1599, Elizabeth sent Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex, to put the revolt down. To her frustration, he made little progress and returned to England without permission. He was replaced by Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, who took three years to defeat the rebels. O'Neill finally surrendered in 1603, a few days after Elizabeth's death.

As a child I had learned of Sir Francis Drake “circumnavigation of the globe from 1577 to 1580” and Sir Walter Rayleigh’s discovery of the potato and tobacco in the New World. Earlier, I related that the “Shadow” was unable to “taint” North America for several hundred years. This was because it was during the reign of Queen Elizabeth that “the first colonization or ‘planting’ of new land in North America” took place. The first established settlement was the “colony of Virginia”, which “was named by her when she modified the name of a Native American regional ‘king’ named ‘Wingina’ that had been recorded in 1584 by the Sir Walter Raleigh expedition.” This is key to understanding how as an agent of the “Light”, Queen Elizabeth ensured that the first English settlement was infused with the American Continent’s agents of the “Light”, namely the indigenous peoples of the land. There was however, a particular blight on the reign of Elizabeth through one of her most trusted military advisors that would have repercussions for centuries. This was because, it promoted the “Shadow’s agenda.


The vehicle for this blight was Sir Francis Drake through his implementation of the “Triangular trade or Triangle trade.” According to the entry on Wikipedia for this term:

It is a historical term indicating trade among three ports or regions…The Transatlantic Triangular Trade operated during the 17th, 18th and early 19th centuries, carrying slaves, cash crops, and manufactured goods between West Africa, the Caribbean or American colonies and the European colonial powers, with the northern colonies of British North America, especially New England, sometimes taking over the role of Europe.

The entry for Sir Francis Drake explains how he became entangled with the “slave-trade.” It seems that the first Englishman to engage in the transportation of slaves was a man named “John Lok” who purchased “five slaves” from the nation of “Guinea” in 1555. The next instance of English “slave-trading was by “William Towerson”, who transported slaves from Africa in 1556 and 1557. Sir Francis Drake was involved in the third “English slave-trading” foray to West Africa:

Around 1563 Drake first sailed west to the Spanish Main, on a ship owned and commanded by his uncle John Hawkins, with a cargo of people forcibly removed from the coast of West Africa. The Englishmen sold their African captives into slavery in Spanish plantations. These activities undermine the tendency to view Drake as simply an untarnished English hero. Although slavery was legal throughout the world at the time, its expansion by Hawkins (and Drake) is now widely seen as a great blot upon their records. In general, the kidnapping and forced transportation of people was considered to be a criminal offence under English law at the time, although legal protection did not extend to slaves, non-Protestants or criminals. Hawkins' own account of his actions (in which Drake took part) cites two sources for their victims. One was military attacks on African towns and villages (with the assistance of rival African warlords).

As the first two instances of slave-trading occurred before Queen Elizabeth’s reign, it is hard to assess her role in the practice. True Sir Francis Drake was the queen’s favorite, but that was more for his circumnavigation of the globe and the defeat of the Spanish Armada. Sir Francis was selling the slaves to the “Spanish plantations”, which he would have to keep quite as England and Spain during Elizabeth’s reign were officially at war. As a representative of the “Light”, the queen would have been appalled at the practice of slave-trading and it would certainly serve the “Shadow” to keep her in the dark, no pun intended.
Returning to Elizabeth’s foreign policy, Queen Elizabeth made alliances with other world powers during her reign, which included, initiating “Trade and diplomatic relations…between England and the Barbary states.” The trade with Morocco was in direct “opposition to Spain” and in defiance of “a Papal ban.” This trade with Morocco led directly to a visit from a Moor ambassador. Evidently, “In 1600, Abd el-Ouahed ben Messaoud, the principal secretary to the Moroccan ruler Mulai Ahmad al-Mansur, visited England as an ambassador to the court of Queen Elizabeth (I), in order to negotiate an Anglo-Moroccan alliance against Spain.”
Unfortunately, the alliance never materialized, because both Al-Mansur and Queen Elizabeth died “within two years.” Although one of the reasons for the alliance was to gain an ally against Spain, it says a lot for Elizabeth’s tolerance towards Islam. This is further strengthened when we hear that during her reign “Diplomatic relations were also established with the Ottoman Empire.” Moreover “For the first time, a Treaty of Commerce was signed in 1580.”
The alliance with the Ottoman Empire led to many “exchanges…between Elizabeth and Sultan Murad (III).” Apparently, the Sultan felt their alliance extended to more than just as trading partners. The entry relates an amazing “correspondence” in which “Murad entertained the notion that Islam and Protestantism had ‘much more in common than either did with Roman Catholicism, as both rejected the worship of idols’, and argued for an alliance between England and the Ottoman Empire.” The question has to be asked as to why an English Queen, who had many family connections with European royalty, would side with an Islamic empire, over her fellow Christian monarchs? From a secular perspective, the answer is that she resented the Catholic King of Spain’s support of deposing her in favor of the Catholic Mary, Queen of Scots. However, from a consciousness perspective, if we remember that King Phillip of Spain was a Hapsburg, who was an agent for the “Shadow”, we can see Elizabeth’s reasoning behind her alliances. The goal of the “Light” is to unite rather than divide and the Ottoman Empire had united a large portion of the world.
The alliances with the Moors of the Barbary Coast, also led to England making an alliance with Japan. Sadly, this was also the way the “Shadow” gained an entry into England. However, this will not come to full manifestation until later, so I will not address it here. The entry explains how England came to know of Japan:

The first Englishman to reach Japan, William Adams, was a former employee of the Barbary Company, which had been established in 1585. He set foot in Japan in August 1600, as a pilot for the Dutch East India Company. He would play a key role as a counselor to the Japanese Shogun, and helped establish the first diplomatic contacts and commercial treaties between England and Japan.

Leaving Queen Elizabeth’s foreign relations, I want to discuss the greatest evidence of the influence of the “Light” during her reign. We cannot speak of Elizabethan England without thinking of the greatest playwright in history, William Shakespeare. Shakespeare is so clearly a member of the “Orders of the Quest” and although so much has been written about him, this thesis would not be complete without a brief entry about this remarkable bard.


I was surprised to learn that Gnostic terminology can be detected in Shakespeare’s works. For instance in the “The Prince and Me” the character of the Danish Prince Edward explains to an American that Shakespeare’s words have multiple meanings. For instance, the Sun being hidden by heaven could be seen as Reason being blinded by love. This is the same method used by the Gnostics to conceal a deeper meaning within everyday commentary.
Having learned that Shakespeare may have hidden esoteric knowledge in his plays, which confirms his identity as a member of the “Orders of the Quest” I was curious to know more about him, particularly what inspired him? Consequently, I looked him up on Wikipedia as I felt his biography might provide a clue. I was pleased to find that although his biography did not reveal his inspiration, an examination of his works did show how the “Light” inspired him to influence the mass consciousness through his audience:

The first recorded works of Shakespeare are Richard III and the three parts of Henry VI, written in the early 1590s during a vogue for historical drama. Shakespeare's plays are difficult to date, however, and studies of the texts suggest that Titus Andronicus, The Comedy of Errors, The Taming of the Shrew and The Two Gentlemen of Verona may also belong to Shakespeare’s earliest period. His first histories, which draw heavily on the 1587 edition of Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, dramatise the destructive results of weak or corrupt rule and have been interpreted as a justification for the origins of the Tudor dynasty. The early plays were influenced by the works of other Elizabethan dramatists, especially Thomas Kyd and Christopher Marlowe, by the traditions of medieval drama, and by the plays of Seneca. The Comedy of Errors was also based on classical models, but no source for The Taming of the Shrew has been found, though it is related to a separate play of the same name and may have derived from a folk story. Like The Two Gentlemen of Verona, in which two friends appear to approve of rape, the Shrew's story of the taming of a woman's independent spirit by a man sometimes troubles modern critics and directors.
Shakespeare's early classical and Italianate comedies, containing tight double plots and precise comic sequences, give way in the mid-1590s to the romantic atmosphere of his greatest comedies. A Midsummer Night's Dream is a witty mixture of romance, fairy magic and comic lowlife scenes. Shakespeare's next comedy, the equally romantic Merchant of Venice, contains a portrayal of the vengeful Jewish moneylender Shylock, which reflects Elizabethan views but may appear derogatory to modern audiences. The wit and wordplay of Much Ado About Nothing, the charming rural setting of As You Like It, and the lively merrymaking of Twelfth Night complete Shakespeare's sequence of great comedies. After the lyrical Richard II, written almost entirely in verse, Shakespeare introduced prose comedy into the histories of the late 1590s, Henry IV, parts 1 and 2, and Henry V. His characters become more complex and tender as he switches deftly between comic and serious scenes, prose and poetry, and achieves the narrative variety of his mature work. This period begins and ends with two tragedies: Romeo and Juliet, the famous romantic tragedy of sexually charged adolescence, love, and death; and Julius Caesar—based on Sir Thomas North's 1579 translation of Plutarch's Parallel Lives—which introduced a new kind of drama. According to Shakespearean scholar James Shapiro, in Julius Caesar "the various strands of politics, character, inwardness, contemporary events, even Shakespeare's own reflections on the act of writing, began to infuse each other".
…Many critics believe that Shakespeare's greatest tragedies represent the peak of his art. The titular hero of one of Shakespeare's most famous tragedies, Hamlet, has probably been discussed more than any other Shakespearean character, especially for his famous soliloquy "To be or not to be; that is the question." Unlike the introverted Hamlet, whose fatal flaw is hesitation, the heroes of the tragedies that followed, Othello and King Lear, are undone by hasty errors of judgement. The plots of Shakespeare's tragedies often hinge on such fatal errors or flaws, which overturn order and destroy the hero and those he loves. In Othello, the villain Iago stokes Othello's sexual jealousy to the point where he murders the innocent wife who loves him. In King Lear, the old king commits the tragic error of giving up his powers, initiating the events which lead to the murder of his daughter and the torture and blinding of the Earl of Gloucester…In Macbeth, the shortest and most compressed of Shakespeare's tragedies, uncontrollable ambition incites Macbeth and his wife, Lady Macbeth, to murder the rightful king and usurp the throne, until their own guilt destroys them in turn. In this play, Shakespeare adds a supernatural element to the tragic structure. His last major tragedies, Antony and Cleopatra and Coriolanus, contain some of Shakespeare's finest poetry and were considered his most successful tragedies by the poet and critic T. S. Eliot.
In his final period, Shakespeare turned to romance or tragicomedy and completed three more major plays: Cymbeline, The Winter's Tale and The Tempest, as well as the collaboration, Pericles, Prince of Tyre. Less bleak than the tragedies, these four plays are graver in tone than the comedies of the 1590s, but they end with reconciliation and the forgiveness of potentially tragic errors. Some commentators have seen this change in mood as evidence of a more serene view of life on Shakespeare's part, but it may merely reflect the theatrical fashion of the day. Shakespeare collaborated on two further surviving plays, Henry VIII and The Two Noble Kinsmen, probably with John Fletcher…
In 1593 and 1594, when the theatres were closed because of plague, Shakespeare published two narrative poems on erotic themes, Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece…In Venus and Adonis, an innocent Adonis rejects the sexual advances of Venus; while in The Rape of Lucrece, the virtuous wife Lucrece is raped by the lustful Tarquin. Influenced by Ovid's Metamorphoses, the poems show the guilt and moral confusion that result from uncontrolled lust. Both proved popular and were often reprinted during Shakespeare's lifetime. A third narrative poem, A Lover's Complaint, in which a young woman laments her seduction by a persuasive suitor, was printed in the first edition of the Sonnets in 1609. Most scholars now accept that Shakespeare wrote A Lover's Complaint. Critics consider that its fine qualities are marred by leaden effects. The Phoenix and the Turtle, printed in Robert Chester's 1601 Love's Martyr, mourns the deaths of the legendary phoenix and his lover, the faithful turtle dove. In 1599, two early drafts of sonnets 138 and 144 appeared in The Passionate Pilgrim, published under Shakespeare's name but without his permission…
Published in 1609, the Sonnets were the last of Shakespeare's non-dramatic works to be printed. Scholars are not certain when each of the 154 sonnets was composed, but evidence suggests that Shakespeare wrote sonnets throughout his career for a private readership…Few analysts believe that the published collection follows Shakespeare's intended sequence. He seems to have planned two contrasting series: one about uncontrollable lust for a married woman of dark complexion (the "dark lady"), and one about conflicted love for a fair young man (the "fair youth"). It remains unclear if these figures represent real individuals, or if the authorial "I" who addresses them represents Shakespeare himself, though Wordsworth believed that with the sonnets "Shakespeare unlocked his heart"…Critics praise the Sonnets as a profound meditation on the nature of love, sexual passion, procreation, death, and time.
The production of Shakespeare's Sonnets was in some way influenced by the Italian sonnet: it was popularised by Dante and Petrarch and refined in Spain and France by DuBellay and Ronsard. Shakespeare probably had access to these last two authors, and read English poets as Richard Field and John Davies. The French and Italian poets gave preference to the Italian form of sonnet—two groups of four lines, or quatrains (always rhymed a-b-b-a a-b-b-a) followed by two groups of three lines, or tercets (variously rhymed c-c-d e-e-d or c-c-d e-d-e)—which created a sonorous music in the vowel rich Romance languages, but in Shakespeare it is artificial and monotonous for the English language. To overcome this problem derived from the difference of language, Shakespeare chose to follow the idiomatic rhyme scheme used by Philip Sidney in his Astrophel and Stella (published posthumously in 1591), where the rhymes are interlaced in two pairs of couplets to make the quatrain…
Shakespeare's standard poetic form was blank verse, composed in iambic pentameter. In practice, this meant that his verse was usually unrhymed and consisted of ten syllables to a line, spoken with a stress on every second syllable. The blank verse of his early plays is quite different from that of his later ones…Once Shakespeare mastered traditional blank verse; he began to interrupt and vary its flow. This technique releases the new power and flexibility of the poetry in plays such as Julius Caesar and Hamlet. Shakespeare uses it, for example, to convey the turmoil in Hamlet's mind…
Shakespeare's poetic genius was allied with a practical sense of the theatre. Like all playwrights of the time, Shakespeare dramatised stories from sources such as Petrarch and Holinshed. He reshaped each plot to create several centres of interest and show as many sides of a narrative to the audience as possible. This strength of design ensures that a Shakespeare play can survive translation, cutting and wide interpretation without loss to its core drama. As Shakespeare’s mastery grew, he gave his characters clearer and more varied motivations and distinctive patterns of speech. He preserved aspects of his earlier style in the later plays, however. In his late romances, he deliberately returned to a more artificial style, which emphasised the illusion of theatre.

The excerpt from William Shakespeare’s entry not only confirms that he used his talent to present moral and spiritual lessons, but he mastered the skill of using sound to impart hidden wisdom subliminally. I say this because The Ancient Mysteries were handed down orally through music and poetry by the bards and troubadours of history.
Returning to Queen Elizabeth, under Elizabeth many, many more members of the “Orders of the Quest would thrive. We will discuss two of them a little later, but for now I want to address the “Light’s” greatest success under Elizabeth. As the entry for this aspect of Queen Elizabeth’s reign is definitive, I will let it speak for itself:

Elizabeth established an English church that helped shape a national identity and remains in place today. Those who praised her later as a Protestant heroine overlooked her refusal to drop all Catholic practices. Historians note that in her day, strict Protestants regarded the Acts of Settlement and Uniformity of 1559 as a compromise. In fact, Elizabeth believed that faith was personal and did not wish, as Francis Bacon put it, to ‘make windows into men’s hearts and secret thoughts’.
Despite Elizabeth’s largely defensive foreign policy, her reign raised England’s status abroad. ‘She is only a woman, only mistress of half an island,’ marvelled Pope Sixtus V, ‘and yet she makes herself feared by Spain, by France, by the Empire, by all’. Under Elizabeth, the nation gained a new self-confidence and sense of sovereignty, as Christendom fragmented. Elizabeth was the first Tudor to recognise that a monarch ruled by popular consent. She therefore always worked with parliament and advisers she could trust to tell her the truth—a style of government that her Stuart successors failed to follow. Some historians have called her lucky; she believed that God was protecting her…Elizabeth trusted in God, honest advice, and the love of her subjects for the success of her rule. In a prayer, she offered thanks to God that:
[At a time] when wars and seditions with grievous persecutions have vexed almost all kings and countries round about me, my reign hath been peacable, and my realm a receptacle to thy afflicted Church. The love of my people hath appeared firm, and the devices of my enemies frustrate.


In the previous “upstepping” I discussed the rise of the Ottoman Empire and the reign of Sultan Suleiman and his wife Roxelana. Suleiman was known as the Magnificent, because as I said, under his reign the Empire expanded to rule fifteen million people. I mentioned that the Ottoman Empire replaced the Byzantine Empire, or the remnant of Constantine’s Eastern Roman Empire as the ruling power in Asia Minor. Nonetheless, there was still a Western Roman Empire, which had evolved into the Holy Roman Empire. Although not the Holy Roman Emperor, according to his entry, the King of Spain Phillip (II) “considered himself by default the chief defender of Catholic Europe, both against the Ottoman Turks and against the forces of the Protestant Reformation.” As a result, Phillip “never relented from his war against what he regarded as heresy, preferring to fight on every front at whatever cost rather than countenance freedom of worship within his territories.” As Philip’s campaign involved Holland, France and England, these European nations sought alliances with the Ottoman Empire, which the entry for the Empire describes:

France and the Ottoman Empire, united by mutual opposition to Habsburg rule in both Southern Europe and Central Europe, became strong allies during this period. The alliance was economic and military, as the sultans granted France the right of trade within the Empire without levy of taxation. In fact, the Ottoman Empire was by this time a significant and accepted part of the European political sphere, and entered into a military alliance with France, the Kingdom of England and the Dutch Republic against Habsburg Spain, Italy and Habsburg Austria.:

Early on when Philip had taken the throne of Spain, he was confronted by the “rising power of the Ottoman Empire under Suleiman the Magnificent.” His father Charles (I) had faced the feared Ottoman Turkish admiral Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha in 1541 and suffered a crushing defeat. Philip was not about to risk suffering the same fate, consequently:

In 1560 Philip II organized a Holy League between Spain and the Republic of Venice, the Republic of Genoa, the Papal States, the Duchy of Savoy and the Knights of Malta. The joint fleet was assembled at Messina and consisted of 200 ships…

King Philip’s forces were collectively known as the “Holy League”, because the designation implied that “God” was on their side. The Turkish admiral that the “Holy League” faced was named Piyale, and like Barbarossa, he handed the “League” a crushing defeat, by destroying sixty of the League’s ships. It wasn’t until after Suleiman the Magnificent’s death that the “Holy League” was able to find a chink in the Ottoman Empire’s armor. It was during the Battle of Lepanto, which took place on October 7th 1571 under Suleiman’s son Selim II’s rule that the tide turned for the “Holy League.” The League’s forces were headed by Don John of Austria, the son of the Holy Roman Emperor and the brother of King Philip. The Ottoman Empire was led by the Turkish Admiral Ali Pasha. The entry for the battle relates the event thus:

The Battle of Lepanto …took place on 7 October 1571 when a galley fleet of the Holy League, a coalition of Spain (including their territories of Naples, Sicily and Sardinia), the Republic of Venice, the Papacy (under St. Pope Pius V), the Republic of Genoa, the Duchy of Savoy, the Knights Hospitaller and others, decisively defeated the main fleet of Ottoman war galleys.
The five-hour battle was fought at the northern edge of the Gulf of Patras, off western Greece, where the Ottoman forces sailing westwards from their naval station in Lepanto met the Holy League forces, which had come from Messina. Victory gave the Holy League temporary control over the Mediterranean, protected Rome from invasion, and prevented the Ottomans from advancing further into Europe. This last major naval battle fought largely between rowing vessels has been assigned great symbolic importance since then.

The key-word in determining the importance of the Battle of Lepanto is “symbolic”, because up until the defeat at Lepanto, the Ottoman Empire had a reputation of “invincibility.” However, after the battle the Turks were able to quickly regroup and “recapture Tunis with a force of 250 galleys and a siege which lasted 40 days.” The end result of the “Holy League’s” victory at Lepanto was “a permanent reversal in the balance of naval power in the Mediterranean and the end of the threat of complete Ottoman control of that sea.” This “reversal” eventually led to the signing of a “peace treaty between the Ottoman Empire and the nations of the “Holy League” in 1585.
As stated, the Ottoman Sultan that Queen Elizabeth (I) made an alliance with was Murad (III), who was the grandson of Suleiman the Magnificent. The Sultans of the Ottoman Empire did not only make alliances with England, they also made strategic alliances with the French and Dutch. Despite the alliances the Ottoman Empire made with France, England, and Holland, because the Ottoman’s maintained a “blockade” to the “sea-lanes to the East and South, the European powers were driven to find another way to the ancient silk and spice routes, now under Ottoman control.” As with the Islamic rule of the Iberian Peninsula, it was a weak ruler coming to power, which led to the Ottoman Empire losing supremacy. The entry reports that although losing ground on the sea, “the Empire remained a major expansionist power until the Battle of Vienna in 1683, which marked the end of Ottoman expansion into Europe.”

While the Ottoman Empire dominated Eastern Europe during the 16th century, the Hapsburg Empire dominated Western Europe, ruling through the Holy Roman Empire. Despite several attempts the Catholic Hapsburg’s were unable to reverse the development of Protestant England and the Church of England held the religious reigns from that time on forever severing the pope’s authority in England. However, the main benefit to the “Light’s” plan during Queen Elizabeth’s reign was the expansion and dissemination of knowledge. Moreover, during the Elizabethan Age, the arts flourished. This is never so evident than in two extremely influential members of the “Orders of the Quest”, who were able to freely write and discuss The Mysteries. The more famous of the two is Sir Francis Bacon.


Sir Francis Bacon was a major figure of the Renaissance. He was the student of Dr John Dee. Everywhere I looked, I kept coming across this mysterious man. So apart from being John Dee’s student, who was Bacon? According to the entry for him on Wikipedia, Sir Francis Bacon, also known as the “1st Viscount St Alban” was born in January of 1561. History records he “was a British philosopher, statesman, and essayist, but is best known as a philosophical advocate and defender of the scientific revolution…”
Bacon was a prolific writer and “His works established and popularized an inductive methodology for scientific inquiry.” This method became known as the “Baconian method or simply, the scientific method.” The most interesting element to Bacon’s method was that it was “connected with the occult trends of hermeticism and alchemy…”
The entry goes on to explain that as an Astrologer, Bacon believed the “stars had physical effects on the planet.” In my history class at school, Bacon was most famous for writing his novel “The New Atlantis” that proposed a “utopian” society that existed in ancient times could be reproduced. But in my research, the most surprising comment I learned concerned Bacon’s philosophy. It seems that he “did not propose an actual philosophy, but rather a method of developing philosophy.” This is endorsed by Bacon’s own words which the entry records thus:

He wrote that…the philosopher should instead proceed through inductive reasoning from fact to axiom to law…The end of induction is the discovery of forms, the ways in which natural phenomena occur, the causes from which they proceed.

The entry also relates that “Bacon distinctly separated religion and philosophy.” His big thing was the use of Reason, which he thought distinguished religion and philosophy, because “philosophy is based on reason” whereas “faith is based on revelation.” Bacon explained this in “The Essays: Of Atheism” that “‘a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion’, suggesting he continued to employ inductive reasoning in all areas of his life, including his own spiritual beliefs.” Bacon thought the discoveries brought from China would be world-impacting and wrote that:

“Printing, gunpowder and the compass: These three have changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world; the first in literature, the second in warfare, the third in navigation; whence have followed innumerable changes, in so much that no empire, no sect, no star seems to have exerted greater power and influence in human affairs than these mechanical discoveries.” - Novum Organum


David Shugarts in his book SECRET OF THE WIDOW’S SON THE MYSTERIES SURROUNDING THE SEQUEL TO THE DAVINCI CODE had relayed that John Dee was the royal astrologer to Queen Elizabeth (I) and was an instructor of Francis Bacon. Mr. Shugarts reports:

“As a young man, Bacon (Francis) received instruction in a number of arcane subjects from Dr. John Dee, perhaps the foremost magus in England at the time. From Dee he learned the gematria of the Kabbalah, which led him to master codes and ciphers. Dee was a mathematician, alchemist, cipher writer, and was adept in various sciences…There are strong connections that make Dee a likely source of the ideas that later emerged as Rosicrucianism in Germany.”11

Considering the importance that Francis Bacon had in the history of both the United Kingdom and the United States, it seemed to me from the above that John Dee might have been just as influential. What does traditional history have to say about John Dee’s beliefs? According to the entry for Dr. Dee on Wikipedia, although a Christian he “was deeply influenced by the Hermetic and Platonic-Pythagorean doctrines that were pervasive in the Renaissance.” Although, Dr. Dee’s Hermetic and Platonic-Pythagorean influence was important, I felt his most important contribution was in the Kabbalistic Gematria. Dr. Dee believed that the numbers from 0 to 9 “was the basis of all things and the key to knowledge,” which demonstrated Gematria proved that “God’s creation was an act of numbering.”
Following other Hermetic philosophers, Dr. Dee believed “that man had the potential for divine power”, moreover, “this divine power could be exercised through mathematics…His ultimate goal was to help bring forth a unified world religion through the healing of the breach of the Catholic and Protestant churches and the recapture of the pure theology of the ancients…” Apparently, Dr. Dee was involved in the English colonization of America. The entry relates:

…As well as being an Astrological, scientific and geographical advisor to Elizabeth and her court, he was an early advocate of the colonization of North America and a visionary of a British Empire stretching across the North Atlantic.
Dee promoted the sciences of navigation and cartography…he owned an important collection of maps, globes and astronomical instruments. He developed new instruments as well as special navigational techniques for use in Polar Regions. Dee served as an advisor to the English voyages of discovery, and personally selected pilots and trained them in navigation.

As an astrologer, Dr. Dee knew of the work of Nicolas Copernicus. In fact according to his entry, “Many of his astronomical calculations were based on Copernican assumptions.” Surprisingly though “he never openly espoused the heliocentric theory.” Despite this, I do not feel that Dr. Dee believed in the geocentric theory either, but rather he was circumspect in openly defying the conventional wisdom of the day. To me the fact that Dr. Dee was an advisor to Queen Elizabeth speaks volumes to the consciousness in England during her reign.
However, all good things must come to an end eventually and the stretch of the “Light’s” almost exclusive influence in England is no exception. Nonetheless, Queen Elizabeth’s influence did not end with her death; essentially, because the Virgin Queen’s legacy was far reaching. The entry for her on Wikipedia sums up her reign so perfectly that I will let the excerpt speak for itself:

Despite Elizabeth's largely defensive foreign policy, her reign raised England's status abroad. "She is only a woman, only mistress of half an island," marvelled Pope Sixtus V, "and yet she makes herself feared by Spain, by France, by the Empire, by all". Under Elizabeth, the nation gained a new self-confidence and sense of sovereignty, as Christendom fragmented. Elizabeth was the first Tudor to recognise that a monarch ruled by popular consent. She therefore always worked with parliament and advisers she could trust to tell her the truth—a style of government that her Stuart successors failed to follow. Some historians have called her lucky; she believed that God was protecting her. Priding herself on being ‘mere English’, Elizabeth trusted in God, honest advice, and the love of her subjects for the success of her rule; In a prayer, she offered thanks to God that:

[At a time] when wars and seditions with grievous persecutions have vexed almost all kings and countries round about me, my reign hath been peacable, and my realm a receptacle to thy afflicted Church. The love of my people hath appeared firm, and the devices of my enemies frustrate.

As stated, I believe that on some occasions the trust Queen Elizabeth afforded to the “honest advice” from her advisors was misplaced; as in the case of Mary Queen of Scots and Sir Francis Drake. When Queen Elizabeth’s death left the kingdom without an heir, I had puzzled why she had not married and had children to carry on her mission. But later, I realized there was a deeper purpose for Queen Elizabeth not marrying and remaining the Virgin Queen. Elizabeth’s father Henry (VIII) had united Wales to England and Ireland. So when James (VI) of Scotland, Mary Queen of Scots son was crowned James (I) of England, Scotland too became united to England, Wales, and Ireland, forming the United Kingdom of today. If Elizabeth had married and had children, her offspring would have ascended to the throne, which could have resulted in Scotland remaining a separate kingdom. In part B of Section 8, I will start with an examination of the fundamental causes that drove the consciousness of the 17th Century.

SECTION 8B 1558 C.E – 1750 C.E.

In order to discover the energetic causes that drove the consciousness in the 17th century, I will have to regress for a moment to examine the British Isles or as they were known then, the Kingdom of England, Ireland and Wales and the Kingdom of Scotland during the 14th, 15th and 16h Centuries. In the previous “upstepping” I recounted the theory of Christopher Knight and Alan Butler in their book Solomon’s Power Brokers: that many of the French Templars relocated to Switzerland and started the Swiss banks. Traditionally, as I also related the legends were that some of the French Templars escaped to Scotland and were responsible for the building of Rosslyn Chapel. Consequently, the first thing I needed to do was investigate the validity of the Scottish legend.


Granting that Rosslyn Chapel reflects both Templar and Freemason symbology, does this prove that some of the Templars escaped to Scotland in the 14th century? Earlier, I said that David Shugarts “made a strong case for the French Templars escaping to Scotland, the night before the order was disbanded.” I also related that apart from the Swiss theory, “Temple Church in London shows, the Templars were widely spread throughout Europe, and there may well already have been Scottish Templars.”
Nonetheless, the main reason I investigated the Templar connection to the British Isles, was to ascertain whether these powerful members of the “Orders of the Quest” were present in the region, during the emergence of the House of Tudor. Although, Scotland and England were two distinct countries, with their own ruling monarchy, as was related, the two kingdoms were connected through their respective blood relatives. Having considered the possibility of the presence of the Knights Templar in Scotland, and concluding that there is a strong indication the order was present at this time, my next question was were the Scottish Templars tainted by the actions of Jacques de Molay? The answer I arrived at was yes and no; however, the negative aspect of the Templars in the British Isles would not surface until much later. In the 14th and 15th centuries, the Templars in Scotland were operating as agents of the “Light”, fulfilling their mission to ground The Mysteries in stone, with the construction of Rosslyn Chapel.
In reviewing the above, I realized that I had not considered if the Templars that relocated to Switzerland were affected by Jacques de Molay’s curse. In considering this question now, I realized to answer it I had to look at how Switzerland developed and whether or not The Mysteries were promulgated there. I learned that Switzerland was caught up with the Reformation, which led to the formation of the Swiss Reformed Church led by Huldrych Zwingli. I found the excerpt below from his entry on Wikipedia:

Huldrych (or Ulrich) Zwingli (1 January 1484 – 11 October 1531) was a leader of the Reformation in Switzerland. Born during a time of emerging Swiss patriotism and increasing criticism of the Swiss mercenary system, he attended the University of Vienna and the University of Basel, a scholarly centre of humanism. He continued his studies while he served as a pastor in Glarus and later in Einsiedeln where he was influenced by the writings of Erasmus.
In 1519, Zwingli became the pastor of the Grossmünster in Zürich where he began to preach ideas on reforming the Catholic Church. In his first public controversy in 1522, he attacked the custom of fasting during Lent. In his publications, he noted corruption in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, promoted clerical marriage, and attacked the use of images in places of worship. In 1525, Zwingli introduced a new communion liturgy to replace the mass. Zwingli also clashed with the radical wing of the Reformation, the Anabaptists, which resulted in their persecution.
The Reformation spread to other parts of the Swiss Confederation, but several cantons resisted, preferring to remain Catholic. Zwingli formed an alliance of Reformed cantons which divided the Confederation along religious lines. In 1529, a war between the two sides was averted at the last moment. Meanwhile, Zwingli’s ideas came to the attention of Martin Luther and other reformers. They met at the Marburg Colloquy and although they agreed on many points of doctrine, they could not reach an accord on the doctrine of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
In 1531 Zwingli’s alliance applied an unsuccessful food blockade on the Catholic cantons. The cantons responded with an attack at a moment when Zürich was badly prepared. Zwingli was killed in battle at the age of 47. His legacy lives on in the confessions, liturgy, and church orders of the Reformed churches of today.

From the above I would have to deduce that the Templars role in Switzerland changed. Obviously, Switzerland’s focus on banking was hardly conducive to spiritual advancement, so the Templars role of disseminating The Mysteries was discontinued in Switzerland. However, the country’s general stance on religious tolerance and neutrality over the centuries affords Switzerland as spiritually neutral. In conclusion then, the Templars that relocated to Switzerland were no longer members of the “Orders of the Quest.” Nevertheless, as I said, the Templars in Scotland were operating as agents of the “Light”, in constructing Rosslyn Chapel to ground The Mysteries in stone. Because this occurred in the 15th century, we can see that the “Light” was definitely present during the emergence of the House of Tudor.
Having determined that the House of Tudor was inspired by the “Light”, I now want to examine the role the family played in Spiritual Evolution. The House of Tudor was founded by a Welshman named Owen Tudor, who married King Henry V’s widow, Katherine of Valois. His grandson Henry (VII) was the first acknowledged Tudor king, however, it was his son Henry VIII’s reign that would cause the greatest stir, through as I have extensively covered, his divorce from both his first wife, Katherine of Aragon and the Catholic Church.
My history teacher at school told us that Henry (VIII) formed the Church of England because the Catholic Church wouldn’t give him a divorce from his wife so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. Nonetheless, although this is the official reason for Henry (VIII) forming the Church of England, in light of the presence of the “Light” in the region, I wondered if Henry had a deeper reason for his actions. I needed to remember that Henry (VIII) was born at the end of the 15th (1400s) century when the European Renaissance was well under way. What is more, Henry (VIII) was reigning during the “Grand Conjunction” of 1524 and the consciousness shift. One name attached to Henry (VIII) that might shed some more light on the king’s motives is Thomas More.


Evidently, Thomas More was briefly named Lord Chancellor for three years from 1529 to 1532. According to Wikipedia, Sir Thomas earned the, “reputation as a leading humanist scholar...” In addition, “More coined the word ‘utopia’, a name he gave to an ideal, imaginary island nation whose political system he described in a book published in 1516. I was immediately reminded of Sir Francis Bacon’s “utopian city” Atlantis.
Unfortunately, Sir Thomas lost favor with the king when he refused to support his “…claim to be supreme head of the Church of England…” As a believer in a form of a “philosophers’ city” depicted by Plato’s Republic, he would have rejected the dictatorship of Henry (VIII). His refusal to accept Henry’s claim cost him dearly. Not only did it end his “political career,” but it cost him the ultimate price; his “execution as a traitor.” In researching the forming of the Church of England, it seemed to me that Sir Thomas More was in favor of the king’s actions. It was only when the king wanted to set himself up as supreme ruler that they parted company. As Sir Thomas had been the author of “utopia” I wondered if he could have been associated with the “Orders of the Quest.” I found this interesting snippet in an entry on Wikipedia:

More combined his busy political career with a rich scholarly and literary production. His writing and scholarship earned him a considerable reputation as a Christian humanist in continental Europe, and his friend Erasmus of Rotterdam dedicated his masterpiece, In Praise of Folly, to More…The humanistic project embraced by Erasmus and Thomas More sought to reexamine and revitalize Christian theology by studying the Bible and the writings of the Church Fathers in the light of classical Greek tradition in literature and philosophy.

From the excerpt above, I would have to suppose that there is a strong possibility that Thomas More was at least associated with the “Orders of the Quest.” That said, I come to what I believe may have been the real reason Thomas More would support England breaking away from Catholicism. First, let us examine why Henry (VIII) insisted on having his marriage to Catherine of Aragon annulled. I mentioned earlier that the “Light” inspired Anne to refuse to sleep with him out of wedlock ensuring that Elizabeth would be born legitimate, but was that the only reason the “Light” wanted the annulment of Henry’s marriage. On deeper reflection, I now believe there was originally a more relevant reason. I think it concerned the Catholic Church’s connection to the Spanish Inquisition.
To briefly recap on what was said earlier the Spanish King Ferdinand of Aragon formed the Spanish Inquisition and it was formed against Pope Sixtus (IV) wishes. First, obviously Katherine of Aragon was attached to the Spanish royal family. Secondly, its formation united the Church to the state. When I read about Pope Sixtus IV’s reluctance to agree to the Spanish Inquisition, I became curious. Researching his entry on Wikipedia, I found that the pope “…was born to a modest family near Savona, Liguria, Italy,” and that “…He joined the Franciscan Order …”
So far, not that earth shattering, but when I remembered that a relative of Pope Sixtus IV’s had been involved in the assassination of Giuliano de Medici and the failed attempt to assassinate Lorenzo de Medici, the clouds began to clear even more. Although it was one of Pope Sixtus IV’s relative that was involved in the plot, historians suspect there was duplicity between the conspirators and the pope. This is suspected because of the “Holy Father’s” nepotism. According to Wikipedia, all four of his nephews gained financially, one, Rafaela Riario he would elevate to Cardinal, who later became Pope Julius (II), reigning from 1503-1513.
Further evidence of the need to separate England from Italy is found in the later actions of the De Medicis. Abandoning Florence, two members of the family ascended to the papacy, with Lorenzo’s son Giovanni de’ Medici being elected Pope Leo (X) in 1513 and his (Lorenzo’s) nephew Giulio di Giuliano de’ Medici becoming Pope Clement (VII) in 1523. Both of these popes reign were pivotal times for the Catholic Church. It was during Pope Leo’s reign that Martin Luther posted his ninety-five theses, and according to Pope Leo’s entry on Wikipedia his reign is famous for the practice of “selling indulgences.” As for Pope Leo’s cousin, Pope Clement (VII), it was during his reign that Henry (VIII) would break from the Catholic Church. Clearly, these two members of the de Medici’s were operating under the influence of the “Shadow.” Nonetheless, on the whole the De Medici family was also instrumental in infusing Italy with the “Light” through their sponsorship of great works of art by members of the “Orders of the Quest.”


Leaving the Medicis, I come to what I consider the most infamous Renaissance Italian family, namely the Borgias. Unfortunately there was no ambiguity over which side influenced the infamous Borgias. However, I was surprised to learn from an entry on Wikipedia that rather than being Italians, they were originally Spaniards. Furthermore, they too were connected to my investigation into the cause for the founding of the Church of England. Their entry on Wikipedia explains the Borgia’s connection to Spain:

Although the Borgia family is closely associated with the Italian Renaissance, they were of Spanish origin and the name is of Valencian/Catalan origin; the family used the Valencian language among themselves, for privacy, even in Italy. There is a town in Spain called Borja which is the seat of the Camp de Borja comarca, in the province of Zaragoza in Aragon. But the Borjas themselves were Valencian. Alexander VI created for Giovanni Borgia the title duke of Gandía, a Valencian fief he purchased from King Ferdinand II of Aragon.

Connecting the Borgias to Spain provided the main reason why the Church of England was formed. I will cover just one of the most famous Borgia’s, Pope Alexander (VI). An entry on Wikipedia reports:

On the death of Pope Innocent VIII (1484–1492)…Borgia was elected on 11 August 1492, assuming the name of Alexander VI.
Alexander’s elevation did not at the time excite much alarm…But it was not long before his passion for endowing his relatives at the church’s and his neighbors’ expense became manifest. To that end he was ready to commit any crime and to plunge all Italy into war. Alexander VI had four children by his mistress…three sons and a daughter: Giovanni, Cesare, Goffredo (or Giuffre) and Lucrezia. Cesare…was made Archbishop of Valencia, and Giovanni received a cardinal’s hat and the dukedom of Gandía, the Borgias’ ancestral home in Spain…
…Spain was anxious to be on good terms with the papacy in order to obtain the title to the newly discovered continent of America. Alexander, in the bulldivided the title between Spain and Portugal along a demarcation line…
In spite of the splendors of the Pontifical court, the condition of Rome became every day more deplorable. The city swarmed with Spanish adventurers, assassins, prostitutes and informers; murder and robbery were committed with impunity, and the Pope himself cast aside all show of decorum, living a purely secular life; indulging in the chase, and arranging dancing, stage plays and orgies (culminating in the debaucherous Banquet of Chestnuts of 1501) within the Vatican itself…
…In order to dominate the Sacred College of Cardinals more completely, Alexander, in a move that created much scandal, created twelve new cardinals, among them his own son Cesare…and Alessandro Farnese (later Pope Paul III), the brother of one of the Pope’s mistresses...
Alexander gave away the temporal estates of the papacy to his children as though they belonged to him. The secularization of the church was carried to a pitch never before dreamed of, and it was clear to all Italy that he regarded the papacy as an instrument of worldly schemes with no thought of its religious aspect. During his pontificate the church was brought to its lowest level of degradation. The condition of his subjects was deplorable, and if Cesare’s rule in Romagna was an improvement on that of the local tyrants, the people of Rome have seldom been more oppressed than under the Borgia.
…Even if the stories of his murders, poisonings and immoralities are not all true, there is no doubt that his greed for money and his essentially vicious nature led him to commit a great number of crimes. For many of his misdeeds his terrible son Cesare was responsible, but of others the pope cannot be acquitted…

In school, I learned about the infamous Borgias. At the time I had been appalled at the corruption of the Catholic Church. Recently, when I was led to discover that the “Shadow’s” energy had infiltrated the Catholic Church during the Renaissance I had just accepted it without understanding. However, learning that at least one member of the Church was indulging in black magic, I could now see why I was told that shocking statement. Because of this I could clearly see that Catholicism during the Renaissance no longer carried even the slightest trace of the “Light’s” energy and was thoroughly infused with the energy of the “Shadow.” Consequently, I could see why Sir Thomas More encouraged Henry (VIII) to separate from the Catholic Church. So putting all the pieces together, I would construe that although most probably unaware of it, Henry (VIII) was following a higher purpose other than marrying Anne Boleyn, when he broke from the Catholic Church.
Even though the “Shadow” had taken over in Italy, there were still pockets of the “Light” in the country, because members of the “Orders of the Quest” continued to promote the agenda of the “Light” through art and literature. Because of Trithemius’s codes, these individuals were able to communicate with each other in relative safety. Nevertheless, because the final showdown, so to speak was to be North America, the “Light’s” energy was working on the regions and peoples that would be responsible for the consciousness in the forming of the United States of America. As the English would be the predominant nation in the experiment, the “Light” continued to influence the country. Unfortunately, after the death of Queen Elizabeth (I), the “Shadow” began to make inroads with the populace.


When Queen Elizabeth (I) died in 1603 without heirs the throne of England passed to her late cousin Mary Queen of Scots’ son James (VI) of Scotland. When James took the throne of England as James (I), the country was still divided between the Catholics and Protestants. Demonstrating the influence of the “Light”, James maintained the status quo and continued the “Golden Age” the country had known under “Good Queen Bess” (Queen Elizabeth). James I’s reign is most famous for two specific events. The first occurred two years after he took the throne on November 5th 1603 and was known as the famous gunpowder plot by Guy Fawkes; the second was not exactly attached to a specific date, but rather an important creation. This “important creation” was the translation and printing of the King James Version of the Bible, published in 1611.
The Gunpowder plot by Guy Fawkes was a Catholic plot to destroy the English Parliament. Despite this James sought an alliance with Catholic Spain by planning a marriage between his son Charles, the Prince of Wales and Maria Anna, the daughter of King Philip (III) of Spain. The negotiations fell through and the marriage never took place. Nonetheless, the peace treaty England had signed with Spain in 1604 ending the Anglo-Spanish war still held.
According to his entry on Wikipedia the reign of James (I) was a time of “uninterrupted peace…” Although James had been given a “bad review” by earlier historians, the entry relates that many have revised this earlier assessment. This revision was spurred by “The stability of James’s government in Scotland…as well as his relatively enlightened views on religious issues and war…”
So on the whole, the reign of James (I) seems to have promoted the “Light’s” agenda more than the “Shadow’s.” Nonetheless, the “Light’s” main focus was not on King James and England during the 17th century, but on King James’ daughter Princess Elizabeth and a small kingdom in Europe. However, before I discuss the “Light’s” interest in Europe, I want to return to Spain and Italy, where the “Shadow” was completely in charge. Dealing with Spain first, because the country was no longer at war with England, the “Shadow” began to loose ground with the populace. It is important to keep in mind that in times of peace the energy and consciousness of a region raises substantially and the “Shadow’s” influence weakens.
Philip (III) of Spain succeeded his father Philip (II) in 1598, five years before the death of Queen Elizabeth and James being crowned King of England. Although Philip (III) succeeded in making peace with England, his son was not of the caliber of his father and was easily influenced, as is the case of the “Expulsion of the Moriscos.” The entry for the Spanish Inquisition relates how this came about:

In 1609 King Philip III, upon the advice of his financial adviser the Duke of Lerma and Archbishop of Valencia Juan de Ribera, decreed the Expulsion of the Moriscos. Hundreds of thousands of converts from Islam to Catholicism were expelled, some of them probably sincere Christians. This was further fueled by the religious intolerance of Archbishop Ribera who quoted the Old Testament texts ordering the enemies of God to be slain without mercy and setting forth the duties of kings to extirpate them. The edict required: ‘The Moriscos to depart, under the pain of death and confiscation, without trial or sentence... to take with them no money, bullion, jewels or bills of exchange.... just what they could carry.’ So successful was the enterprise, in the space of months, Spain was emptied of its Moriscos and Moors. Expelled were the Moors of Aragon, Murcia, Catalonia, Castile, Mancha and Extremadura. As for the Moriscos of Granada, such as the Herrador family who held positions in the Church and magistracy, they still had to struggle against exile and confiscation.
An indeterminate number of Moriscos remained in Spain and, during the 17th century, the Inquisition pursued some trials against them of minor importance: according to Kamen, between 1615 and 1700, cases against Moriscos constituted only 9 percent of those judged by the Inquisition.

Speaking of the “religious” organization Spanish Inquisition, I have not yet addressed the Catholic Church’s response to the Protestant Reformation. Predictably, the Catholic Church’s response to the Protestant Reformation was the Catholic Church’s own Reformation, known as the Counter-Reformation.


The Catholic Counter-Reformation began in 1560; forty-three years after Martin Luther began the Protestant Reformation by nailing his ninety-five thesis to the door of All Saints Church in Wittenberg, Germany. The reason it took so long for the Catholic Church to respond, was because it took that long for the members of the Catholic Church to decide which side to support. The entry for the Counter-Reformation on Wikipedia informs us that the term Counter-Reformation, was “used primarily by non-Catholics.” However, the Catholic response to the Protestant Reformation was “aimed primarily at reducing the loss of the faithful to Protestantism.” The author of the entry states categorically that “The term ‘Catholic Reformation’ identifies it as an action of the Church, not a reaction to Protestant Reformers.”
That said, the “Counter-Reformation” of the Catholic Church was defined by the Council of Trent, which was “about suppressing abuses and corruption within the Roman Catholic Church for the sake of its own virtue…” The Council of Trent, which ran from 1545 to 1563, was instigated by Pope Paul (III), who had come to power seventeen years after Luther posted his thesis. Realizing that for the Catholic Church to survive, it would have to reform, the pope called “a commission of cardinals tasked with institutional reform, to address contentious issues such as corrupt bishops and priests, indulgences, and other financial abuses.”
Although making reforms, the “Council clearly rejected specific Protestant positions and upheld the basic structure of the Medieval Church, its sacramental system, religious orders, and doctrine.” One of the main bones of contention with the Protestants was the doctrine of Transubstantiation. This doctrine was the belief that during Holy Communion “the consecrated bread and wine were held to be transformed wholly and substantially into the body, blood, humanity and divinity of Christ…” It is hard to see where the Catholic Church made reforms, because as the entry states, “Other practices that drew the ire of Protestant reformers, such as indulgences, pilgrimages, the veneration of saints and relics, and the veneration of the Virgin Mary were strongly reaffirmed as spiritually vital. The Council also commissioned the Roman Catechism, which would serve as authoritative Church teaching until it was replaced by the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992.”
Nonetheless, the author of the entry believes that “while the basic structure of the Church was reaffirmed, there were noticeable changes.” It seems that the main reform was “the growing divide between the clerics and the laity.” The entry explains this is because:

Many members of the clergy in the rural parishes…had been poorly educated. Often, these rural priests did not know Latin and lacked opportunities for proper theological training (addressing the education of priests had been a fundamental focus of the humanist reformers in the past). Parish priests were to be better educated in matters of theology and apologetics, while Papal authorities sought to educate the faithful about the meaning, nature and value of art and liturgy, particularly in monastic churches (Protestants had criticized them as distracting). Notebooks and handbooks became more common, describing how to be good priests and confessors.
Thus, the Council of Trent was dedicated to improving the discipline and administration of the Church. The worldly excesses of the secular Renaissance church, epitomized by the era of Alexander VI (1492-1503), exploded in the Reformation under Pope Leo X (1513-1522), whose campaign to raise funds in the German states to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica by supporting sale of indulgences was a key impetus for Martin Luther's 95 Theses…

As I said, it is hard to see any reform in the Catholic Counter-Reformation, at least to the benefit of the congregation. The Council of Trent appears to me to have been about consolidating power, which is demonstrated by the statement that “the organization of religious institutions was tightened, discipline was improved, and the parish was emphasized.” Nevertheless, there was one particular reform that suggests the Council was attempting to route out corruption, which is explained by the entry as, “The appointment of Bishops for political reasons was no longer tolerated.”
In respect to Spiritual Evolution though, very little “reform” was in line with the “Light’s” agenda. For instance, “The Council of Trent also gave bishops greater power to supervise all aspects of religious life…At the parish level, the seminary-trained clergy who took over in most places during the course of the seventeenth century were overwhelmingly faithful to the church’s rule of celibacy.”
Unfortunately, the Catholic Counter-Reformation as history has shown resulted in the Catholic Church acting even more as the agent of the “Shadow” than before. If this assessment appears harsh then consider what occurred under the first popes of the Counter-Reformation. The entry’s explanation speaks for itself:

The reign of Pope Paul IV (1555-1559), who is sometimes deemed the first of the Counter-Reformation popes for his resolute determination to eliminate Protestantism - and the ineffectual institutional practices of the Church that contributed to its appeal - marks these efforts of Catholic renewal. Two of his key strategies were the Inquisition and censorship of prohibited books. In this sense, his aggressive and autocratic efforts of renewal greatly reflected the strategies of earlier reform movements, especially the legalist and observantine sides: burning heretics and strict emphasis on Canon law. It also reflected the rapid pace toward absolutism that characterized the sixteenth century.
While the aggressive authoritarian approach was arguably destructive of personal religious experience, a new wave of reforms and orders conveyed a strong devotional side. Devotionalism, not subversive mysticism would provide a strong individual outlet for religious experience, especially through meditation such as the reciting of the Rosary. The devotional side of the Counter-Reformation combined two strategies of Catholic Renewal. For one, the emphasis of God as an unknowable absolute ruler - a God to be feared - coincided well with the aggressive absolutism of the Church of Paul IV. But it also opened up new paths toward popular piety and individual religious experience to its strong emotional and psychological side.
The Papacy of St. Pius V (1566-1572), in this sense, represented a strong effort not only to crack down against heretics and worldly abuses within the Church, but also to improve popular piety in a determined effort to stem the appeal of Protestantism. A man of impoverished upbringing taken in by the Dominicans, he was trained in a solid and austere piety. It is thus no surprise that he began his pontificate by giving large alms to the poor, charity, and hospitals rather than focusing on patronage. As pontiff he practiced the virtues of a monk, known for daily meditations on bent knees in presence of the Blessed Sacrament. Known for consoling the poor and sick, St. Pius V sought to improve the public morality of the Church, promote the Jesuits, and support the Inquisition. He enforced the observance of the discipline of the Council of Trent, and supported the missions of the New World. The Spanish Inquisition, brought under the direction of the absolutist Spanish state since Ferdinand and Isabella, stemmed the growth of heresy before it could spread.
The pontificate of Pope Sixtus V (1585-1590) opened up the final stage of the Catholic Reformation characteristic of the Baroque age of the early seventeenth century, shifting away from compelling to attracting. His reign focused on rebuilding Rome as a great European capital and Baroque city, a visual symbol for the Catholic Church.

Something I should have mentioned earlier is that after 1525 C.E., the “Light” could inspire whole communities to affect change. This was predominantly seen in the “Orders of the Quest”, after the Renaissance developing into a network of secret societies that worked together for the benefit of Humanity.


I found a reference to secret societies emerging during the Renaissance in David Stevenson’s THE ORIGINS OF FREEMASONRY Scotland’s Century 1590-1710. Explaining the general thought of the day, he relates people of the Renaissance believed everything was alive and connected by “…a network of spiritual forces, and everything shared in some way in the divine.”12 It was also believed, “In this great system of animate matter there was a complex web of correspondences or relationships which linked matter at different levels, the microcosm of man and the macrocosm of the universe…occult forces linked the movements of the stars and the fortunes of men…”13 Astrologers of the day, strived to read the stars “…by study of correspondences and of the spiritual forces that animated the universe…”14 This belief led to the practice of magic in order to control the natural forces. Professor Stevenson sums up the reasoning of the time, by relating that Sir Walter Raleigh wrote, “The art of magic is the art of worshipping God", Professor Stevenson explains that Sir Walter thought, “…magic was essentially ‘a humble supplication that God should extend’ to the practitioner ‘the privilege of a unique view of his mysteries.”15 From this we are to believe that the Renaissance man thought of magic as a “holy quest.”
Professor Stevenson explains the “quest” became rooted in the alchemist search for the philosophers’ stone. This wasn’t the means to turn lead into gold, but a quest for the spiritualization of the human race.16 The Professor relates that the Renaissance saw the resurgence in Neoplatonism, saying the “Neoplatonist universe was drenched in the spiritual, and was to be understood through purification and revelation. The ultimate goal was spiritual perfection, in which man merged with the divine spirit which pervaded the universe…The climax of the Neoplatonist occult striving in general, like that of alchemy, came around 1600…The philosopher sought understanding of the hidden or secret spiritual forces of the universe, and though the understanding achieved was to be utilized to benefit mankind as a whole it was not to be communicated to all…It was sought in secret by individuals…”17 It was through the need for secrecy that secret societies were formed. This is because; there was “…great danger…in revealing how to summon up the powers of nature to the untrained and untrustworthy who might misuse such knowledge.”18
The influence of the members of secret societies is often seen throughout history as mysterious figures appearing at opportune moments. These individuals could be seen as Manly P Hall’s “unknown philosophers.” Anyway, after 1525 the Melchizedek/Sophia energy was subtler, so I needed to look for their symbols and teaching within various groups that influenced society to track them. As expected, the most obvious signs of their influence were in the alchemists and astrologers of the Renaissance, which continued Leonardo da Vinci’s work.
The most famous alchemists and astronomers were, Paracelsus, Nicolaus Copernicus, Giordano Bruno and Galileo. I’ve discussed Paracelsus’ contribution to the Renaissance at length elsewhere, so I will move on to the astronomer, Nicolaus Copernicus. According to his entry on Wikipedia, Nicolaus Copernicus born 1473 had “resurrected the ancient model of the Solar System and published a book, which put forth the theory that the Sun was at the center of the Solar System, not the Earth…”

This was revolutionary to the Church as it removed the superiority of mankind. Nonetheless, what Copernicus did was reinstate the Sun as the center and therefore the most important orb. All initiates knew that the Sun represented Spirit and the “Light” and therefore the Sun-Christ.

Despite the Church being opposed to Copernicus’ book, when Copernicus published it they had remained silent. That wasn’t the case when another astronomer, took up Copernicus’ gauntlet. Consequently, when Galileo Galilei, born 1564 offered his theories of the heliocentric system, the Church was ready and launched a full attack on him. Consequently, I deal with Galileo before Giordano Bruno.


Despite Galileo’s motive for promoting Copernicus’ heliocentric theory being to support Creationism, the Catholic Church went after him. His entry relates when “the attacks…reached a head” in 1616 Galileo travelled to Rome to appeal directly to “the Church authorities not to ban his ideas.” At this time, the Inquisition was the determining factor for what was considered to be orthodox (straight thinking) and what was considered heretical. The entry explains that “Cardinal Bellarmine” was directed by the Inquisition to order Galileo “not to ‘hold or defend’ the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre.” Nonetheless, the order did not preclude Galileo hypothesizing on the heliocentric model and this was how Galileo was able to avoid the “the controversy” for some years.
When his good friend Cardinal Barberini was elected pope in 1623 and became Pope Urban (VIII), Galileo became bolder and wrote his theories in a book. Galileo was more confident, because the pope had “opposed the condemnation of Galileo in 1616…” At first Pope Urban (VIII) diplomatically requested Galileo to present “arguments for and against heliocentrism in the book, and to be careful not to advocate heliocentrism. He made another request, that his own views on the matter be included in Galileo’s book.”
Galileo’s book “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems” was not received well by Pope Urban as it seemed to be an “attack on Aristotelian geocentrism and defense of the Copernican theory.” When Pope Urban summoned Galileo to Rome to “explain himself” Galileo was unprepared for the pope’s judgment. Initially, Galileo was sent to prison, however the sentence “was later commuted to house arrest.” Although Galileo appeared to get off lightly, avoiding the hands of the Inquisition, he died a broken man. All works of Galileo were placed on the list of banned books, including anything “he might write in the future.” Consequently, “one of his finest works, “Two New Sciences” remained in obscurity until a time when the restriction to learning was lifted. This important book was a “summarized work he had done some forty years earlier, on the two sciences now called kinematics and strength of materials. This book has received high praise from both Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. As a result of this work, Galileo is often called, the “father of modern physics.”
The treatment of Galileo showed that the Catholic Church’s Counter-Reformation did not move to a more tolerant attitude for different opinions. Instead during the 17th Century the Church consolidated its position as censoring anything discovered that challenged Catholic doctrine. After the forming of the Inquisition, it could enforce its doctrines throughout Christendom. This was the situation that Giordano Bruno became a victim of.


As I said earlier, I always attached the term “Spanish” to the Inquisition and that will be another reason for the forming of the Church of England. During the Renaissance, the most difficult challenge to the doctrines of the Catholic Church was Giordano Bruno’s theories on multiple worlds. For me, this was the strongest evidence for Bruno being a member of the “Orders of the Quest” and under the influence of the “Light.” It is through Giordano Bruno’s contribution that we can understand a little about the doctrine of Rounds and Globes. But who was this innovative, forward thinking man? What does history say about him? The entry on Wikipedia relates that Bruno was born in Naples in 1553. Surprisingly, he started out as a Dominican priest and took the “name of Giordano from Giordano Crispo, his metaphysics tutor.”
I found the information that Bruno studied “metaphysics” while in the Dominican order astounding. After all, the Catholic Church had banned all metaphysical books, so why would a Dominican order teach metaphysics? The answer is found in understanding that a form of “metaphysics” is the use of magic, which as I said is neutral and can be employed as either black or white. The Catholic Church of the Middle-Ages was fully aware of the effectiveness of magic and used it to their own ends.
Getting back to Bruno, his entry informs us that “He was interested in philosophy, and was an expert on the art of memory; he wrote books on mnemonic technique, which Frances Yates contends may have been disguised Hermetic tracts.” The entry’s mention of the author Francis Yates led me to her book, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment19 My main interest in Ms. Yates’ book was in her information on James (I’s) daughter Elizabeth, who became the Queen of Bohemia, but here I would like to relate what she wrote about Giordano Bruno concerning his connection to the Rosicrucians. She relates that Rosicrucianism could be observed in Bruno’s philosophy. Bruno’s philosophy, based on Hermeticism proposed a transformation of the world through “a return to ‘Egyptian’ religion and good magic.” Ms. Yates thinks that Bruno might have been instrumental in the formation of the secret society "Giordansti”, which was popular between followers of Martin Luther in the 16th century. Evidently, “Bruno had visited England…and had shown himself sympathetic to the more esoteric aspects of the Elizabethan chivalric cult.” Ms. Yates cites this as evidence of the “possible influence on ‘Rosicrucianism’ mingling with other influences.” However, what I found most informative from Ms. Yates was the suggestion that those “influences may have come from ‘a secret stream originating in the Netherlands’.” She concludes, that “a Bruno movement might appeal to secret movements in Italy; and that all such influences might have co-existed with an English esoteric movement…”20
My question was “How did a Dominican priest become involved with the esoteric movement of the Rosicrucians?” It seems that Bruno’s studies opened his mind to The Mysteries. Although his entry on Wikipedia does not say this exactly, the information it provides leads to that very conclusion. For instance, it reports that:

While the Hermetic Tradition was a major influence on Bruno, he also absorbed and developed the heliocentric ideas of Copernicus…Other significant influences included Thomas Aquinas, whose works he had to study in depth as a novice…Averroes, whose idea of a universal mind resonates through Bruno’s work, Duns Scotus, the Renaissance Neoplatonist Marsilio Ficino, and, last but certainly not least, Nicholas of Cusa’s ideas on infinity and indeterminacy, particularly the idea of an infinite universe where Earth has no special place…

Because of his discoveries, when he was forty-three according to his entry Bruno “left Naples to avoid the attention of the Inquisition. He left Rome for the same reason and abandoned the Dominican order. He travelled to Geneva and briefly joined the Calvinists, before he was excommunicated…in autumn 1579, deeply disappointed by Calvinist intolerance, he left for France.” He travelled to England in 1583, but before that “His talents attracted the benevolent attention” of the French king, Henry (III). Henry was like Queen Elizabeth (I) in that he “supported a conciliatory, middle-of-the-road cultural policy between Catholic and Protestant extremism…”
When Bruno went to England in 1583, he had with him “letters of recommendation from Henry (III)”, which facilitated his employment by “the French ambassador, Michel de Castelnau.” While in England “he became acquainted…with the Hermetic circle around John Dee…” Under the Golden Age of Elizabeth, “Bruno completed and published some of his most important works…” Giordano Bruno managed to avoid the clutches of the Inquisition until February of 1593, when he was imprisoned in Rome, awaiting trial for heresy. The entry lists the charges against Bruno “as follows”:

Holding opinions contrary to the Catholic Faith and speaking against it and its ministers
Holding erroneous opinions about the Trinity, about Christ’s divinity and Incarnation
Holding erroneous opinions about Christ
Holding erroneous opinions about Transubstantiation and Mass
Claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their eternity
Believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the human soul into brutes
Dealing in magics and divination
Denying the Virginity of Mary

Despite being a former member of the Church, the Catholic Church showed no mercy to Bruno when he refused to recant “belief in the plurality of worlds.” The future Pope Urban, then Inquisitor Cardinal Barberini conducted the proceedings and after it became clear that Bruno would not recant convicted Bruno of heresy and “handed (him) over to secular authorities on February 8, 1600…A month or so later he was brought to …a central Roman market square, his tongue in a gag, tied to a pole naked and burned at the stake, on February 17, 1600…”
Although the following section is disputed according to Wikipedia, I include it, because I feel it is a valid different perspective on Giordano Bruno’s teachings. As always, it is up to each one of you to spiritually discern what the Truth is:

In 1584, Bruno published two important philosophical dialogues, in which he argued against the planetary spheres…Bruno’s infinite universe was filled with a substance -- a “pure air,” aether, or spiritus -- that offered no resistance to the heavenly bodies which, in Bruno’s view, rather than being fixed, moved under their own impetus. Most dramatically, he completely abandoned the idea of a hierarchical universe. The Earth was just one more heavenly body, as was the Sun…God, according to Bruno, was as present on Earth as in the Heavens, an immanent God, the One subsuming in itself the multiplicity of existence, rather than a remote heavenly deity.
Bruno also affirmed that the universe was homogeneous, made up everywhere of the four elements (water, earth, fire, and air), rather than having the stars be composed of a separate quintessence. Essentially, the same physical laws would operate everywhere, although the use of that term is anachronistic. Space and time were both conceived as infinite. There was no room in his stable and permanent universe for The Christian notions of divine Creation and Last Judgement.
…According to Bruno, infinite God necessarily created an infinite universe, formed of an infinite number of solar systems, separated by vast regions full of Aether, because empty space could not exist…
Bruno’s cosmology is marked by infinitude, homogeneity, and isotropy, with planetary systems distributed evenly throughout. Matter follows an active animistic principle: it is intelligent and discontinuous in structure, made up of discrete atoms. This animism (and a corresponding disdain for mathematics as a means to understanding) is the most dramatic respect in which Bruno’s cosmology differs from what today passes for a common-sense picture of the universe…
Bruno’s overall contribution to the birth of modern science is still controversial. Some scholars follow Frances Yates stressing the importance of Bruno’s ideas about the universe being infinite and lacking structure as a crucial crosspoint between the old and the new. Others disagree. Others yet see in Bruno’s idea of multiple worlds’ instantiating the infinite possibilities of a pristine, indivisible One a forerunner of Everett’s Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Ostensibly, it is Giordano Bruno’s Hermetic teachings that make him a contender not only for a member of the “Orders of the Quest”, but also for an incarnation of Melchizedek. However, despite his phenomenal insight into modern astronomy, he didn’t understand the role of the Life Principle and Consciousness. Subsequently, although Giordano Bruno was undoubtedly a member of the “Orders of the Quest”, I would have to deduce that he was not an incarnation of Melchizedek.


Earlier I discussed the evidence of the Catholic Counter-Reformation as demonstrating the influence of the “Shadow.” However, I have not yet determined which side initiated the Protestant Reformation. Because, the Reformation of the Church led to tremendous upheaval and unrest in Europe, the movement obviously reflected the energy of the “Shadow.” However, there is evidence that shows the Reformation also reflected the influence of the “Light.”
The Reformation is a case of both sides benefiting from an event, because of the different results of the Reformation on the Christian Church. Dealing with the Reformation reflecting the “Shadow’s” energy first, the evidence of this can be seen in the persecution manifested through the Peasants War. This energy generates fear and aggression and does not promote spiritual evolution; therefore because of the climate of fear, the Reformation could represent the “Shadow”, particularly the “prince of this world’s” energy. In a nutshell, it is impossible for Humanity to advance consciously, when they are in a constant state of fear for their very survival.
Alternatively, the Reformation reflected the “Light’s” energy because it bred a new kind of theologian. This had amazed me, because I never considered anything to do with Martin Luther as beneficial to spiritual growth. But Professor Stevenson in his book ORIGINS OF FREEMASONRY: associates Lutheranism with Rosicrucianism. He relates that the Rosy-Cross symbol was, “…the coat of arms adopted by Martin Luther…”21 He reminds us that … “the rose, especially” was known from antiquity to represent Aphrodite or Venus. As Sophia also represents Venus, to hear that Martin Luther adopted the rose for his coat of arms was very thought provoking. Professor Stevenson further astounded me, by relating that a Rosicrucian document “…that was published in Germany at least since 1610…originated in the work of Lutheran esoteric mystics at the end of the sixteenth century.”22 Moreover, he connects both Rosicrucianism and Lutheranism with Hermeticism. Professor Stevenson adds that Rosicrucian writings reflected the Hermetic “…search for wisdom through the study of nature and ancient Egyptian mysteries…”23


Above I related that the “Light’s” agenda was not concentrated on Queen Elizabeth’s successor James (I), but on his daughter Princess Elizabeth, who had married the future Elector Palatine of the small kingdom of Bohemia. According to her entry on Wikipedia Elizabeth, born in 1596, “was the eldest daughter of King James of England, Scotland and Ireland, and Anne of Denmark.”
Elizabeth became the Electress Palatine in 1613 when “she married Frederick (V), then Elector of the Palatinate, and took up her place in the court at Heidelberg.” It seems as a child; Princess Elizabeth was part of the “Gunpowder Plot” of 1605. The entry reports that “Part of the intent of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605” had been to “kidnap the nine-year-old Elizabeth” in order to restore the Catholic monarchy by replacing her father King James with Elizabeth on the English throne. To achieve this, obviously the plot also entailed the assassination of King James and the “Protestant English aristocracy.”
Even if the “plot” had succeeded, I sincerely doubt that Elizabeth would have been a “Catholic monarch.” This is because as the instrument of the “Light” she had been groomed to unite the Protestant kingdoms of Europe. The first step in the “grooming” was in inspiring Elizabeth to marry Frederick, who “was the leader of the association of Protestant princes in the Holy Roman Empire known as the Evangelical Union.” Although not a member, King James was not antagonistic to the union, because the king hoped to “increase” his “ties to these princes.” The entry for Elizabeth goes on to relate that “In 1619, Frederick was offered and accepted the crown of Bohemia.” Because Elizabeth was his wife, she “was crowned Queen of Bohemia on 7 November 1619, three days after her husband was crowned King of Bohemia.”
The story of the king and queen of Bohemia is thoroughly covered in Francis Yates’ book The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, which I mentioned earlier. Ms. Yates informs us that no expense was spared for the marriage between King James’ daughter Princess Elizabeth and the Elector Palatine Frederick (V) that took place February 1613. Emphasizing the impact the alliance between the two kingdoms had, Ms. Yates explains the citizens of London were ecstatic with the prospect of extending the “Elizabethan Age” through the “alliance” of an English Princess and a German who was not only the “leader of the German Protestants” but also “a grandson of William the Silent…” The marriage was seen as a continuation of Queen Elizabeth’s stalwart “support of Europe against Hapsburg aggression…”24
The young couple’s marriage occurred at the height of the Catholic Counter-Reformation when the Catholic Church was readying itself for “a new assault on heresy.” Although their marriage had been arranged, the young princess and the Elector Palatine “fell in love.” Ms Yates relates how the death of Elizabeth’s brother Henry, the Prince of Wales had dashed the hopes of the Protestant princes. Evidently, Prince Henry had showed himself to be an able “leader” and a “possible successor” for the assassinated Henri of France to challenge the Hapsburg Empire. It seems that Henry also had ambitious goals “for ending ‘the jars in religion’.” Alas, his untimely death from typhoid in 1612 meant that a valuable ally to Elizabeth and Frederick was lost. As Ms. Yates relates Henry’s “influence on his father…would certainly have been used in the interest of his sister and her husband.”25
The European Protestant alliance known as the “Evangelical League” had first been born as Ms. Yates relates, “According to the author of Naometria” in July of 1586 at “a meeting at Luneburg.” The League was formed by a few “evangelical Princes and Electors’ and representatives of the King of Navarre, the King of Denmark, and the Queen of England.” The primary purpose of the original meeting was to mount a united protestant or evangelical front in “defense against the Catholic League…”26


Heidelberg castle, where Elizabeth and Frederick held court according to Ms. Yates became a focal point for “strange and exiting influences.” The “exiting influences” continued to flow from the castle for several years after “Elizabeth’s arrival there.” Although Heidelberg castle was impressive, it was the amazing and magnificent garden at Heidelberg, which was the most impressive. Heidelberg Garden was the perfect example of gardens designed during the Renaissance. The garden included “mechanical fountains which could play musical tunes, in speaking statues and other devices of this kind.” These innovative garden marvels, were inspired with the rediscovery of “ancient texts describing such marvels by Hero of Alexandria and his school.” The designer that utilized the ancient knowledge was a French Protestant named Salomon de Cause, a particularly “extremely brilliant garden-architect” who was originally in the employ of Elizabeth’s brother Prince Henry as his “surveyor.” De cause was also a “hydraulic engineer.”
When Prince Henry died, his surveyor Salomon de Caus was employed by Frederick as the “architect and engineer” responsible for the innovative “improvements” to the house and grounds of Heidelberg Castle. Ms. Yates informs us that de Caus took his cue from the 1st century BCE Roman writer, architect and engineer, Vitruvius. Vitruvius “recommends as necessary for the true architect to know, the arts, and sciences based on number and proportion, music, perspective, painting, mechanics, and the like. Vitruvius had stated that architecture was the queen of the mathematical sciences…”27 According to Ms. Yates, in its time, the Heidelberg Garden was referred to as the “eighth wonder of the world.” She describes the gardens amazing features thus:

“This marvelous garden, (Heidelberg) perched above the town and the valley of Neckar, was talked of as an eighth wonder of the world…De Caus had constructed many grottos in the garden containing scenes enlivened with music from mechanical fountains and formed mythological figures, Parnassus with the Muses, or Midas in a cave. Very striking was the statue of Memnon, a Hercules-Memnon with a club. This statue gave forth sounds when the sun’s rays struck it, as in the classical story. The scientific magic by which this affect was achieved is shown in the engraving; it was derivative from the pneumatics of Hero of Alexandria. Salomon de Caus believed in music as the chief of the sciences based on number…”28

Not surprisingly, Ms. Yates believes that both the Elector and Electress Palatine was familiar with Francis Bacon’s “The Advancement of Learning.” She deduces this because The Queen of Bohemia was known to been “interested” and enjoyed the works of Bacon “in later life.” Ms. Yates helped me to identify the Elector Palatine as a member of the “Orders of the Quest”, by informing us that Frederick “was an intellectual and a mystic, and deeply interested in music and architecture.” Admirably, the king and queen must have shared their knowledge with their children because Ms. Yates tells us that their children inherited their “philosophical tastes.” Alas the mystical and philosophical sanctuary at Heidelberg did not last long. Their reign as King and Queen of Bohemia “ended with…the outbreak of the Thirty Years War which was to devastate the Palatinate and destroy the splendors of Jacobean Heidelberg.”29


The Thirty Years War was between the Protestant princes, led by the Elector Palatine and the Catholic Hapsburgs. Before I leave this sad state of affairs, which favored the agenda of the “Shadow”, I want to address a brilliant spark of the “Light” amidst the darkness. I used this metaphor because the “Light” was the Hapsburg Holy Roman Emperor Rudolph (II) who was the Holy Roman Emperor from 1576 to 1612. Ms. Yates perfectly describes the enlightened rule of this Catholic emperor “Prague under Rudolph was a Renaissance city, full of Renaissance influences as they had developed in Eastern Europe, a melting pot of ideas, mysteriously exciting in its potentiality for new developments…”30
Rudolph II’s reign perfectly reveals that anyone anywhere can be an agent for spiritual progress. I was amazed that the “Light” had succeeded in “installing” an obvious member of the “Orders of the Quest” and I wanted to know how “they” had managed such a coup. In researching Rudolph II’s entry on Wikipedia I found the excerpt below from his entry. Please note that in the entry Rudolph is spelt Rudolf:

Rudolf moved the Habsburg capital from Vienna to Prague in 1583. Rudolf loved collecting paintings, and was often reported to sit and stare in rapture at a new work for hours on end. He spared no expense in acquiring great past masterworks… He was also patron to some of the best contemporary artists… Rudolf's collections were the most impressive in the Europe of his day, and the greatest collection of Northern Mannerist art ever assembled.
Rudolf's love of collecting went far beyond paintings and sculptures. He commissioned decorative objects of all kinds and in particular mechanical moving devices. Ceremonial swords and musical instruments, clocks, water works, astrolabes, compasses, telescopes and other scientific instruments, were all produced for him by some of the best craftsmen in Europe.
He patronized natural philosophers such as the botanist Charles de l'Ecluse, and the astronomers Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler both attended his court. Tycho Brahe developed the Rudolfine tables (finished by Kepler, after Brahe's death), the first comprehensive table of data of the movements of the stars…
Rudolf kept a menagerie of exotic animals, botanical gardens, and Europe's most extensive "cabinet of curiosities" …incorporating "the three kingdoms of nature and the works of man". It was housed at Prague Castle, where between 1587 and 1605 he built the northern wing to house his growing collections.
By 1597, the collection occupied three rooms of the incomplete northern wing. When building was completed in 1605, the collection was moved to the dedicated Kunstkammer. Naturalia (minerals and gemstones) were arranged in a 37 cabinet display that had three vaulted chambers in front, each about 5.5 meters wide by 3 meters high and 60 meters long, connected to a main chamber 33 meters long. Large uncut gemstones were held in strong boxes.
Rudolph's Kunstkammer was not a typical "cabinet of curiosities" - a haphazard collection of unrelated specimens. Rather, the Rudolfine Kunstkammer was systematically arranged in an encyclopaedic fashion. In addition, Rudolf II employed his polyglot court physician, Anselmus Boetius de Boodt (c. 1550-1632), to curate the collection. De Boodt was an avid mineral collector. He travelled widely on collecting trips to the mining regions of Germany, Bohemia and Silesia, often accompanied by his Bohemian naturalist friend…Between 1607 and 1611, de Boodt catalogued the Kunstkammer, and in 1609 he published …one of the finest mineralogical treatises of the 17th century.
As was customary at the time, the collection was private, but friends of the Emperor, artists, and professional scholars were allowed to study it. The collection became an invaluable research tool during the flowering of 17th-century European philosophy, the "Age of Reason"…
Astrology and alchemy were mainstream science in Renaissance Prague, and Rudolf was a firm devotee of both. His lifelong quest was to find the Philosopher's Stone and Rudolf spared no expense in bringing Europe's best alchemists to court, such as Edward Kelley and John Dee. Rudolf even performed his own experiments in a private alchemy laboratory. When Rudolf was a prince, Nostradamus prepared a horoscope which was dedicated to him as 'Prince and King'.
Rudolf gave Prague a mystical reputation that persists in part to this day, with Alchemists' Alley on the grounds of Prague Castle a popular visiting place.

Considering the status of John Dee and Nostradamus’ as members of the “Orders of the Quest” having Nostradamus construct a horoscope as a young prince, the “Light” introduced Rudolph to The Mysteries and started his lifetime interest in esotericism. Regrettably, this brief respite in the “Shadow’s” influence during the late 16th and early 17th century did not survive Rudolph’s death.


After Rudolph’s death in 1612, his successor, “Rudolph’s brother Matthias” tried to continue his brother’s policy of tolerance. Unfortunately, this was not well received by according to his entry on Wikipedia “the more intransigent” members of the Hapsburgs, which included Matthias’ brother “Archduke Maximilian.” This was because Archduke Maximilian had his own agenda; he “hoped to secure the succession for the inflexible Catholic Archduke Ferdinand (later Emperor Ferdinand II).”
Ms Yates explains that things came to a head after Emperor Matthias died in 1619. Two years earlier, when a student of the Jesuits was crowned the King of Bohemia. The name of the king was “Ferdinand of Styria” and he was bound and determined to destroy “heresy.” Reflecting the “Shadow’s” influence, Ferdinand’s first “order of business” was to reverse Emperor Rudolph’s guiding principle of “toleration” with the repealing of the “Letter of Majesty.” This was quickly followed by “the oppression of the Bohemian church.” Ms. Yates observes a number of people believe this “oppression” was the real onset of the “Thirty Years War” that originated from the reversal of religious toleration “policies in Bohemia.”31
I was a little confused by the reference to Ferdinand becoming the King of Bohemia in 1617, because Elizabeth and Frederick were crowned king and queen of Bohemia in 1619. Obviously, I was missing something and needed to dig a little deeper. As always, it was the wonderful site Wikipedia’s entry for Bohemia which provided the information I needed. When I first learned of the “Light’s” plan to infuse Europe with its agenda through Bohemia, I wondered why they chose this obscure little country. However from the entry for Bohemia, I learned that “Bohemia enjoyed religious freedom between 1436 and 1620, and became one of the most liberal countries of the Christian world during that period of time.”
When James I’s daughter Elizabeth married Frederick and became the Elector and Electress Palatinate, Bohemia was under the iron hand of Emperor Ferdinand (II). It was because of Ferdinand “oppressing the rights of Protestants in Bohemia” that caused the Protestant princes to rebel against the emperor, which as stated “resulted in the outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War in 1618. Although the war was in full swing, the “Bohemian nobility” still replaced Ferdinand, by electing Frederick to the Bohemian throne. Obviously, Ferdinand did not sit back and do nothing and quickly moved to retake Bohemia.
Although Elizabeth’s father was the head of the Protestant Church of England, he did not support his daughter and son-in-law. It seems that although he was eager to make alliances with the “Evangelical League’s” princes, he was unwilling to stand up to the Hapsburgs for them. Consequently, because James did not defend them, Elizabeth and Frederick’s reign only lasted a year from November 4th 1619 to November 8th 1620, when Frederick’s forces were defeated at the Battle of White Mountain. Because their reign was so brief, Elizabeth and Frederick were known as the Winter King and Queen. Although Frederick and Elizabeth managed to escape to The Hague, his confederates were not so lucky. The entry relates that “after Frederick’s defeat…26 Bohemian estates leaders…were executed on the Prague’s Old Town Square and the rest were exiled from the country; their lands were then given to Catholic loyalists (mostly of Bavarian and Saxon origin).”
Although the entry for Bohemia states that Frederick’s defeat and the consequent executions and exiles “ended the pro-reformation movement in Bohemia” it was not a complete failure for the “Light’s” agenda. This is because Heidelberg spurred the mystical movements of Rosicrucianism and Hermeticism that would resurface in the Age of Enlightenment. Nonetheless, despite the “Light’s” apparent failure at the time in Bohemia, it was very successful in other areas of Europe in securing the future. One of the “Light’s” greatest successes was through a member of the “Orders of the Quest” I mentioned in the previous “upstepping.” This individual was responsible for what the majority of people consider is the most important invention of the millennium. His name was Johannes Gutenberg, and together with the mass production of paper, his invention, the printing press facilitated the dissemination of knowledge throughout Christendom.


Rightfully speaking, if I was to follow the timeline, Johannes Gutenberg would have appeared in the previous “upstepping”, because he died in 1468. Nevertheless, he is discussed here, because it is in the 17th century that his invention would have the most relevance to the “Light’s” agenda. Ultimately, Gutenberg’s legacy transcends the passing of time. This is seen in the “ranking” of Gutenberg in the “A&E Network” of Gutenberg as the “#1 on their ‘People of the Millennium’ countdown...” Moreover, “Time–Life magazine picked Gutenberg’s invention as the most important of the second millennium.”Gutenberg’s entry on Wikipedia reports that he was “a German goldsmith” as well as a “printer.” Forgetting the debate of who invented movable type first, he “is credited with being the first European to use movable type printing, in around 1439, and the global inventor of the mechanical printing press.” As stated, his most famous accomplishment was the printing of the Bible, which was named the Gutenberg Bible. The entry says his Bible “has been acclaimed for its high aesthetic and technical quality.” I was familiar with Gutenberg’s reputation as the inventor of the printing press, but I was however unfamiliar with his connection to a mysterious “artist known as the Master of the Playing Cards.”

When I read about the mysterious “Master of the Playing Cards”, I was reminded of Manly P Hall’s “unknown philosophers.” Furthermore, although it is disputed which came first, our modern playing deck is a version of the Tarot’s Minor Arcana. Subsequently, I was intrigued as to who this “Master of the Playing Cards” was? Another name the “unknown philosophers” are known by is members of the “Orders of the Quest.” Was the Master of the Playing Cards one of the “unknown philosophers” who appears to secretly guide Humanity throughout time? As stated, these individuals appear at opportune moments to ensure certain events occur, and then mysteriously fade from history. Was Gutenberg’s connection to the “Master of the Playing Cards” such a case? Wikipedia’s entry on “Master of the Playing Cards” only served to add to the mystery:

The Master of the Playing Cards was the first major master in the history of printmaking. He was a German (or conceivably Swiss) engraver, and probably also a painter, active in South-Western Germany from the 1430s to the 1450s, who has been called “the first personality in the history of engraving.” Various attempts to identify him have not been generally accepted, so he remains known only through his 106 engravings, which include the set of playing cards in five suits from which he takes his name. Most of the set survives in unique impressions, most of which are in the print rooms at Dresden and the Bibliothéque nationale de France in Paris. A further eighty-eight engravings are regarded as sufficiently close to his style to be by his pupils.

According to Francis Yates, the printers of the 16th and 17th centuries were associated to the Rosicrucians and Hermeticists of Europe. One of the printers she singles out is Johann Theodore De Bry who published several Rosicrucian authors. Another famous author published by De Bry was Robert Fludd, the English “Paracelsist physician.” Ms. Yates relates that Robert Fludd’s “philosophy” descended from the Renaissance era “Magia and Cabala”, together with “Paracelsist alchemy.” Moreover, Fludd showed that he was inspired by John Dee.32


I was most interested to learn from Ms. Yates that King James (I) was terrified of the magical arts. She relates it was the king’s “most deep-seated neurosis.” The king demonstrated this in the way he treated Dr. Dee. Unlike Queen Elizabeth, King James distrusted Dr. Dee, refusing to see him and submitting the famous esotericist to “a kind of banishment. Robert Fludd was also labeled as a practitioner of the magical arts by King James and viewed with suspicion. It seems that in an attempt to bring the king around to the Hermetic philosophy, Fludd “dedicated” the first volume of his “Oppenheim volumes the ‘History of the Macrocosm’” to James and according to Ms. Yates strategically “saluted” King James with “the epithet sacred to Hermes Trismegistus.”33
According to his entry on Wikipedia, “Between 1598 and 1604, Fludd studied medicine, chemistry and the occult on the European mainland, but he is best known for his research in occult philosophy. He had a celebrated exchange of views with Johannes Kepler concerning the scientific and hermetic approaches to knowledge.” Fludd’s relationship with King James cannot have been all that bad, because the entry reports that “Fludd was allegedly a member of the committee which drafted the ‘King James’ translation of the bible in 1611.”
Ms. Yates informs us that another Rosicrucian author, also published by De Bry was Michael Maier. His extraordinary writings can be tracked by a precise “time graph.” Interestingly, the “time graph” appears to concern the Heidelberg experience of Frederick and Elizabeth, because it begins one year following the marriage of Frederick and Elizabeth in 1614 and ends in 1620 when Frederick and Elizabeth leave Heidelberg. Maier’s work according to Ms. Yates portrays the signature of “Hermetic mysticism”, which takes the form “of Hermetic or ‘Egyptian’ interpretation of fable and myth, as containing hidden alchemic and ‘Egyptian’ meanings, combined with an idiosyncratic use of alchemical symbolism.”34
Ms. Yates explains that her “study of Fludd and Maier has attempted to show that both these ‘Rosicrucian’ philosophers belonged to the orbit of the Frederickian movement in the Palatinate.” She sums up the importance of the printers, authors and philosophers connected to the Palatinate movement thus:

The importance of printers and publishers in the movement…Hermetic philosophies from England, represented by Fludd…together with the alchemical symbolist movement, propagated by Maier…A culture was forming in the Palatinate which came straight out of the Renaissance…a culture which may be defined by the adjective ‘Rosicrucian’…The movement tried to unite many hidden rivers in one stream; the Dee philosophy and the mystical chivalry from England were to join with German mystical currents. The new alchemy was to unite religious differences…it had created a culture, a ‘Rosicrucian’ state with its court centred on Heidelberg, its philosophic literature published within the state, having artistic manifestations in the alchemical emblem movement around Maier, and in the work of Salomon De Caus.35

Returning to my earlier mention of playing cards representing the Minor Arcana of the Tarot brings me back to the invention of the Tarot Cards. In the previous “upstepping” I discussed the Tarot in regard to Guglielma of Bohemia, but here I want to address one of the most famous members of the “Orders of the Quest” contribution to the Tarot. That member was the renowned Kabbalist and seer, Nostradamus. I first realized that Nostradamus used pictures to pass messages through history in reading about his Lost Manuscript containing 72 graphic plates in Ottavio Cesare Ramotti’s Nostradamus The Lost Manuscript, which I discussed in the previous “upstepping.” I discussed how Mr. Ramotti claimed to have uncovered a code to find a deeper meaning for Nostradamus’ quatrains and had concluded that the “code” had relevance, not because it proved Nostradamus created it, but because it produced comprehendible alternative interpretations for the quatrains.


In this “upstepping” I want to address the purpose of the 72 plates and the possible connection to the first printing of the Tarot in the 15th century. According to the entry for the Tarot on Wikipedia “The oldest surviving tarot cards” are “three” sets believed to be painted by the artist “Bonifacio Bembo.” It seems the “decks” were commissioned by “Francesco Sforza.” Earlier in the entry, the author relates that “It seems apparent that the special motifs on the trump cards…were ideologically determined. They are thought to show a specific system of transporting messages.” Transporting messages between individuals appears to have become an art in the 15th and 16th centuries. Because of the institution of the Inquisition, to openly share thoughts that disagreed with the Church was a decidedly dangerous enterprise. I mentioned earlier that Trithemius had created a way to encode messages supposedly in ordinary letters. The esotericists of the 16th century used art to convey different thoughts. With the advent of the Tarot Trumps, they had a way of hiding in plain sight their messages, which according to the entry, “known early examples show philosophical, social, poetical, astronomical, and heraldic ideas…”

I saw Nostradamus’s connection to the Tarot with two of the 72 plates in his book containing images that appear in the Major Arcana. Although as we discussed elsewhere, the images on the two plates mirror the images on the Rider-Waite deck, which was not created until 1910, it still shows Nostradamus used art to portray esoteric knowledge. To demonstrate this I reproduce an excerpt from our previous discussion:

Looking at the evocative image of the imposing Sun on Plate 66, we were struck with the similarity to the Sun in card 19 The Sun of the Rider-Waite Tarot. To see what we mean it will help to examine the 2 versions side by side. If you look at the Suns you will observe that in both, the Sun’s rays consist of straight and wavy lines and both Suns have human faces

KTI-N-3 Sun KTI-N-2

                                            Plate 66                                                                                                                   Card 19 - The Sun

Once we saw the similarity between Plate 66 and card 19, the question that arose was did Nostradamus use this distinctive version of the Sun to point us to the Tarot? We had already seen a similarity between the images of Plate 35, which we learned was, entitled “The Wheel of Destiny of Nations” and card 10 The Wheel of Fortune.(See below)

    Card 10 - The Wheel of Fortune                                              Plate 35 - Wheel of Destiny of the Nations                

“As we read Mr. Ramotti’s book and examined the Plates in respect to the Major Arcana we concluded that there is a real possibility Nostradamus deliberately used similar symbols to the symbols in the Major Arcana to conceal a deeper meaning.”
The entry for the Tarot on Wikipedia informs us that as the “earliest tarot cards were hand painted” there were only a few decks. However, “after the invention of the printing press” the Tarot decks could be “mass produced.”
According to Mr. Ramotti, a “dedication to its readers” on page 83 relates that the Lost Manuscript, which Nostradamus left “to his son Cesare” reports the 72 plates were given into the care of then Cardinal Barberini, who would become Pope Urban VIII. As the “dedication” mentions the Cardinal before he became pope, Mr. Ramotti concludes the Lost Manuscript must have been left with Barberini before 1623.36

Before I leave Nostradamus again for now, I want to mention one other anomaly that appears in the plates, which has given the naysayers the ammunition to dispute the authenticity of the manuscript. Although the anomaly cannot be seen with the naked eye, under magnification, on the page of the open book in the king’s hand in plate 67 (shown below) is the word “One Male” written in English.


Disputers of Mr. Ramotti’s book, which as I said, includes John Hogue argue that as Nostradamus did not speak English; the manuscript cannot be genuine. Mr. Ramotti supports the assessment that Nostradamus did not speak English saying he spoke “Latin, Greek, Italian, Spanish, and, of course, Provençal.” However, although I have been unable to verify it, I think there is a strong possibility that the esotericists of Europe concealed their beliefs, by communicating in English; could this have been one of the deeper reasons why King Henry (VIII) separated from the Catholic Church? After all, so many of the esoteric groups of the “Orders of the Quest” emerged after the English Reformation.
Very early on in our mission, we were told that the “Key to The Mysteries is hidden in the English Language.” Coincidentally, Dan Brown’s novel Angels and Demons has his lead character Robert Langdon inform the heroine Vitoria Vetra that the Illuminati communicated in English, during the 17th century because it was the one language the clergy of the Vatican did not speak. The character supports his conclusion with the statement that Galileo knew John Milton, citing the painting by Annibale Gatti, which depicts Milton meeting Galileo while under house arrest at Galileo’s farm villa in Arcetri. Obviously, if Milton visited with Galileo there is a strong probability that not only did Milton speak Italian, but that Galileo also spoke English. This will become even more relevant when we discuss the mysterious Illuminati in the next “upstepping.” I will return to Italy in the 17th century shortly, but first I need to briefly mention an astounding development in the Ottoman Empire in 1648.


This development in Islam quite frankly amazed me, because of my experience of living in Saudi Arabia. Although I knew that Saudi was not typical of the treatment of women in Islamic countries. For instance, in Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Iran, women are allowed to work and move about the country freely. Nonetheless, women do not rule the country in any capacity, because only men are monarchs. According to the entry on Wikipedia for the Sultanate of Women: In the 16th and 17th centuries “for almost 130 years, the women of the Imperial Harem of the Ottoman Empire exerted extraordinary political influence” in the Empire’s affairs. The reason was that when the Sultan died, his heirs were not of age to take the reigns; consequently, their mothers in the Harem, to all intense and purposes “effectively ruled the Empire.”
In the entry for the Ottoman Empire, the author relates that “This was not wholly unprecedented” reminding us of Roxelana, also known as the “Hürrem Sultan, who was married to Suleiman the Magnificent. Apparently, Roxelana “established herself in the early 1530s as the successor of Nurbanu…was described by the Venetian Baylo Andrea Giritti as ‘a woman of the utmost goodness, courage and wisdom’ despite the fact that she ‘thwarted some while rewarding others.’”
The entry also relates an alternative reason for the reign of the Sultanate of Women other than the Sultan’s heir was too young to rule. The entry says the extraordinary situation evidently resulted from “the inadequacy of Ibrahim I (1640-1648) and the minority accession of Mohammed (IV) in 1646.” This “created a significant crisis of rule which the dominant women of the Imperial Harem filled. The most prominent women of this period were Kösem Sultan and her daughter-in-law Turhan Hatice, whose political rivalry culminated in Kösem's murder in 1651.”
I was astounded to learn that the wives and mothers of the Ottoman Sultans exercising political influence under the title of Valide Sultan extended up to the 20th century. The last “Valide Sultan was called Rahime Perestu and according to her entry on Wikipedia she was the wife of Ottoman Sultan Abdülmecid (I), adoptive mother and Valide sultan of Abdul Hamid (II). Her death in 1904 marked the end of this remarkable period as no other wife of the sultan received the title of Valide Sultan. Considering the general consensus that that the Arabian sultans were uncivilized barbarians in the 17th century, their ability to accept and give women a political voice shows the opposite. In fact the West during the 16th century with the deplorable behavior of the Borgias was the epitome of barbarism. However, at the start of the 17th century a new era began; the Baroque Era.


Unlike the Renaissance, which began in Florence, the Baroque Era began in Rome. According to Baroque’s entry on Wikipedia this new art was driven by the “canon promulgated at the Council of Trent.” In the council the Catholic Church “addressed the representational arts by demanding that paintings and sculptures in church contexts should speak to the illiterate rather than to the well-informed.” However, although this is the explanation “customarily offered as an inspiration of the Baroque”, the Baroque style of art did not manifest until “a generation” after the Council of Trent. That said, the entry relates that the Roman Catholic Church was instrumental in the theme of the Baroque, which was that “the arts should communicate religious themes in direct and emotional involvement.”
It is through the development of the Baroque style of art, which included architecture and music that we see the purpose of art being fulfilled. I said earlier that the “Light” inspired the great artist members of the “Orders of the Quest”, such as Leonardo da Vinci, Botticelli, and Michelangelo to infuse the “Light” into Italy through their art. Despite, the influence of the “Shadow” on the Catholic Church, the Renaissance art was all over Italy and was affecting a change in the consciousness. This is seen in the Church deciding to use art to affect the populace’s emotions. The entry explains that the change was from “the witty, intellectual qualities of 16th century Mannerist art to a visceral appeal aimed at the senses.”
The “dramatic style of Baroque architecture” was used by the nobles to impress. Like today’s millionaire mansions, the palaces projected “power and control.” This was because, “Baroque palaces are built around an entrance of courts, grand staircases and reception rooms of sequentially increasing opulence.”
Despite the opulence of Baroque palaces, in art the style “employed an iconography that was direct, simple, obvious, and dramatic. Baroque art drew on certain broad and heroic tendencies in Annibale Carracci and his circle…” I was surprised to learn that “Germinal ideas of the Baroque can also be found in the work of Michelangelo.”
Apart from art and architecture, the Baroque era was known for its poetry. In the entry the author associates John Milton’s Paradise Lost as “a Baroque epic.” Moreover, there were other English writers and “metaphysical poets” that “represent a closely related movement”, who also reflected the Baroque style. This is seen with poets seeking “unusual metaphors, which they then examined in often extensive detail. Their verse also manifests a taste for paradox, and deliberately inventive and unusual turns of phrase.” In conclusion the entry sums up how the Baroque era was best defined:

“The Baroque era was defined by Heinrich Wölfflin as the age where the oval replaced the circle as the center of composition, centralization replaced balance, and coloristic and "painterly" effects began to become more prominent. Art historians, often Protestant ones, have traditionally emphasized that the Baroque style evolved during a time in which the Roman Catholic Church had to react against the many revolutionary cultural movements that produced a new science and new forms of religion—the Reformation. It has been said that the monumental Baroque is a style that could give the Papacy, like secular absolute monarchies, a formal, imposing way of expression that could restore its prestige, at the point of becoming somehow symbolic of the Catholic Reformation. Whether this is the case or not, it was successfully developed in Rome, where Baroque architecture widely renewed the central areas with perhaps the most important urbanistic revision during this period of time”


Nonetheless, the name most associated with the Baroque style is the renowned sculptor Bernini. Because of the Dan Brown’s book and film Angels and Demons, the sculptor has been associated with the Illuminati, but before I examine the validity of that conclusion let us take a look at the conventional opinion of Bernini from his entry on Wikipedia:

Bernini was born in Naples (1598) to a Mannerist sculptor, Pietro Bernini, originally from Florence. At the age of seven he accompanied his father to Rome, where his father was involved in several high profile projects. There as a boy, his skill was soon noticed by the painter Annibale Carracci and by Pope Paul V, and Bernini gained the patronage exclusively under Cardinal Scipione Borghese, the pope’s nephew. His first works were inspired by antique Hellenistic sculpture.
Under the patronage of the Cardinal Borghese, young Bernini rapidly rose to prominence as a sculptor. Among the early works for the cardinal were decorative pieces for the garden such as The Goat Amalthea with the Infant Zeus and a Faun, and several allegorical busts such as the Damned Soul and Blessed Soul. By the age of twenty-two years, he completed the bust of Pope Paul V. Scipione's collection in situ at the Borghese gallery chronicles his secular sculptures, with a series of masterpieces:
Aeneas, Anchises, and Ascanius (1619) depicts three ages of man from various viewpoints, borrowing from a figure in a Raphael fresco, and perhaps an allegory reflecting the moment when a son attains the skill of his father…
Apollo and Daphne (1622-25) has been widely admired since Bernini's time; along with the subsequent sculpture of David it represents the introduction of a new sculptural aesthetic…This sculpture tracks the metamorphoses as a representation in stone of a person changing into lifeless vegetation; in other words, while a sculptor's art is to change inanimate stone into animated narrative, this sculpture narrates the opposite, the moment a woman becomes a tree.
David (1623-24) like the Apollo and Daphne was a revolutionary sculpture for its time …The twisted torso, furrowed forehead, and granite grimace of Bernini's David epitomize Baroque fixation with dynamic movement and emotion over High Renaissance stasis and classical severity. Michelangelo expressed David's psychological fortitude, preparing for battle; Bernini captures the moment when he becomes a hero…
Bernini's first architectural project was the magnificent bronze St. Peter's baldachin (1624-1633), the canopy over the high altar of St. Peter's Basilica, and the façade for the church of Santa Bibiana (1624). In 1629, before the Baldacchino was complete, Urban VIII put him in charge of all the ongoing architectural works at St Peter's. He was given the commission for the Basilica's tomb of the Barberini Pope… Bernini fell generally out of favor during the Pamphili papacy of Innocent X. Never wholly without patronage, Bernini again regained a major role in the decoration of St. Peter's with the Pope Alexander VII Chigi, leading to his design of the colonnade and piazza in front of St. Peter's. The Scala Regia entrance to the Vatican and the Chair of Saint Peter (Cathedra Petri), in the apse of St. Peter's, are also some of his masterpieces…
True to the decorative dynamism of Baroque, Roman fountains, part public works and part Papal monuments, were among his most gifted creations. Bernini's fountains are the Fountain of the Triton and the Barberini Fountain…The Fountain of the Four Rivers…in the Piazza Navona is a masterpiece of spectacle and political allegory…
Bernini also gained royal commissions from outside Italy, for subjects such as Louis XIV, Cardinal Richelieu, Francesco I d'Este, Charles I of England and Henrietta Maria. The last two were produced in Italy from portraits made by Van Dyck (now in the royal collection), though Bernini preferred to produce portraits from life - the bust of Charles was lost in the Whitehall Palace fire of 1698 and that of Henrietta Maria was not undertaken due to the outbreak of the English Civil War…
Another of Bernini's sculptures is known affectionately as Bernini's Chick by the Roman people. It is located in the Piazza della Minerva, in front of the church Santa Maria sopra Minerva. Pope Alexander VII decided that he wanted an ancient Egyptian obelisk to be erected in the piazza and commissioned Bernini to create a sculpture to support the obelisk. The sculpture of an elephant was finally created in 1667 by one of Bernini's students, Ercole Ferrata. One of the most interesting features of this elephant is its smile. To find out why it is smiling, the viewer must head around to the rear end of the animal and to see that its muscles are tensed and its tail is shifted to the left. Bernini sculpted the animal as if it were defecating. The animal's rear is pointed directly at the office of Father Domenico Paglia, a Dominican friar, who was one of the main antagonists of Bernini and his artisan friends, as a final salute and last word…
The death of his constant patron Urban VIII in 1644 released a horde of Bernini's rivals and marked a change in his career, but Innocent X set him back to work on the extended nave of St Peter's and commissioned the Four Rivers fountain in Piazza Navona. At the time of Innocent's death in 1655 Bernini was the aribiter of public taste in Rome. He died in Rome in 1680, and was buried in the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore…”

So much for the official historical account of Bernini, now I want to delve into the more mysterious elements of this amazing sculptor. The questions I had about Bernini concerned his association with St. Peters Basilica, but before we get to Bernini’s involvement, I think I should discuss how the Basilica evolved as the seat of Christianity. I related in Section 5 how the energy of Vatican Hill was affected by Nero’s Circus, in which thousands of people met gruesome deaths in its arena. I also mentioned that I seriously doubted that Peter’s body was buried on Vatican Hill. Surprisingly, I found the most helpful information about St. Peter’s tomb in Secrets of Angels & Demons: The Unauthorized Guide to the Bestselling Novel:37 Edited by Dan Burnstein and Arne Keijzer.
The authors think it is curious that when the site believed to be St. Peter’s tomb was excavated, “they recorded no trace of Peter – not one inscription that named him, not even amid the graffiti on his supposed tomb.” The authors point out that the “tomb” has always been surrounded by mysteries, for instance they inform us that when work began on Bernini’s “towering bronze canopy” immediately “the excavators started dropping dead.” Moreover, Pope Urban “fell ill.” In the superstitious 17th century, this was interpreted as Saint Peter cursing those who would “disturb” him, by “striking” them down.38
Nonetheless, this was not the most shocking episode that occurred when workman began excavating the ground beneath the Vatican in 1624. The authors relate “horrified eyewitnesses watched a steady stream of pagan relics issue from the church’s holiest soil, some so scandalous that the pope ordered them dumped in the Tiber.”39
Early investigators of this strange episode of the excavation beneath the Vatican in 1624 did not even venture a guess as to the possible cause for such calamity occurring on such a “holy site”. However, the authors’ of Secrets of Angels & Demons: provide information, which from an energetic perspective suggest a possible cause. Again, although I have discussed this topic extensively, because the information is vital to the thesis, I will share what the authors have to say of the area the Vatican was built on:

“In ancient times, Roman historians tells us; this swampy region beyond the Tiber was an eerie borderland of fevers and giant snakes, where the voices of the gods could be heard. These historians derived the name ‘Vaticanum’ from vates, a holy seer who understood these voices. (Note: or interpret the voices)
“Pliny described an ancient oak, still standing here in his day, on which were bronze Etruscan letters of religious significance. Later, extravagant temples and sacred compounds were built to Eastern deities. The ecstatic rights celebrated here fascinated the Romans, but were too wild to be held within the city itself…The Vatican has always been sacred soil.”40

Returning to the 17th century, Pope Urban’s illness, the deaths of the first workman, or the “scandalous” discoveries did not prevent the completion of Bernini’s masterpiece. His “baldacchino would rise above this hallowed spot.”41
I mentioned earlier that “The Vatican quarter of what was once just Rome” has not always been the permanent residence of the Pope. In the 14th century Pope Clement (V) relocated to Avignon, France in 1309. Six subsequent popes held the Papal Court in Avignon. The Papacy only returned to Rome in 1377 under Pope Gregory (IX), who in his last year of his reign, returned to Rome. Interestingly, Rome only became the Catholic Church’s “exclusive residence” of the reigning pope in 1870.
Today’s Vatican is fundamentally the result of the Renaissance artists, as with Michelangelo creating his memorable “Sistine Chapel.” Nonetheless, at this time we are discussing the changes to the Vatican during the Baroque period. As stated, the key sculptor of this era was Gian Lorenzo Bernini, whose name is synonymous with one of the most important constructions of the Baroque era in Rome, the renovations of Saint Peter’s Basilica.
Mr. Burnstein and Keijzer explain that officials of the Catholic Church were dedicated to ensuring that the “Eternal City”, Rome was “the most beautiful and advanced city in Europe…”42 In 1546 according to his entry on Wikipedia Michelangelo “was appointed architect of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican.” Michelangelo designed Saint Peter’s dome, but according to the authors of the Secrets of Angels & Demons it was Bernini’s contribution to Saint Peter’s Basilica that was “an incredible engineering feat.” This is because “Bernini designed the Piazza of St. Peter’s.” He completed the Piazza in 1667, which he began in 1657. The authors’ “engineering feat” is visible today in the remarkable fact that on a rainy day “there are still no puddles.” They also inform us that the Piazza’s “spectacular entrance to the church was – commissioned” through “several” popes papacys.43
As spectacular as Bernini’s Piazza is, it pales in the magnificent splendor of his Baldacchino. According to the entry for Baldachin (Baldacchino) on Wikipedia:

Pope Urban VIII commissioned Gian Lorenzo Bernini to design and construct a structure that would be placed over the tomb of St. Peter during the building of the new St. Peter's Basilica...
Bernini's design for the Baldachin incorporated giant solomonic columns inspired by columns that ringed the altar of the Old St. Peter's. These columns were originally donated by Constantine and a false tradition asserts they are the columns from the Temple of Jerusalem; however, the columns are probably from a church in Byzantium. The lowest parts of the four columns of Bernini's Baldachin have a helical groove, and the middle and upper sections of the columns are covered in olive and bay branches, which are populated with a myriad of bees and small putti. Pope Urban VIII's family coat of arms, those of the Barberini family, with their signature bees, are at the base of every column.
All of these were combined to create an upward feeling of movement.

Authors Mr. Burnstein and Keijzer relate that the Baldacchino is “a bronze tent” that is situated “over the papal altar at the nave of the church, and the so-called the Chair of St. Peter at the apse of the church.” The authors’ continue “The Baldacchino is over the altar, which is over the traditional place where St. Peter is believed to be buried. As the entry relates, it was done for Pope Urban (VIII) and the symbol of his family, the Barberini’s is the bee. Interestingly, according to the authors, “Bernini encased” the Baldacchino in “bronze with gold leaf.” he also arranged the statues of “four saints and above it put an alabaster window with a dove representing the Holy Spirit.”44
From the information above, I would conclude that Bernini was most definitely a member of the “Orders of the Quest.” It is obvious that many of his works of art were designed to portray a deeper meaning. Although Dan Brown’s book and film designates Bernini as the “anonymous Illuminati artist”, this is fictitious, which brings me to the book/film’s “Path of Illumination” to the “Church of Illumination.”
Historians point out that although Bernini designed and oversaw the construction of St. Peter’s Square, the plaque depicting the “West Wind” was not part of the square until the 19th century. Nevertheless, even though there are other discrepancies concerning Bernini’s sculptures, such as the reference to his Ecstasy of St. Teresa being moved from the Vatican, the book/film’s “Path of Illumination”, does afford us a valuable insight into the purpose and placement of the sculptures.
One of the key clues in Angels & Demons to tracing the “path” was the markers proximity to obelisks. As stated earlier, the obelisk is a symbol of the masculine/active power, which the World Soul used to manipulate Egyptian pharaohs to changing the energy and frequency of the region in “his” favor. I also said that when the “prince of this world” influenced the Roman Caesars to transfer these obelisks to Rome the city also became infused with the energy. This corruption was further enhanced when the “Shadow” instigated placing the Egyptian obelisk that had “oversaw” the bloodiest era in Vatican’s circus, in front of Saint Peter’s Basilica in 1586. Apart from the obelisk in front of St. Peter’s, there are six more Egyptian obelisks in Rome. Surprisingly, two of these obelisks were employed by Bernini in his sculptures.


An accurate fact is the connection of Bernini’s work with obelisks, as is portrayed in the book/film Angels & Demons; in all four piazzas’ where the “markers” of the “path” are located there is or in the case of Piazza Barberini, was an obelisk. So considering that the obelisk is a symbol of the “Shadow”, then why would a member of the “Orders of the Quest”, appear to employ them in his art? The answer lies in the transmutation of energy.
Earlier, I related that the Renaissance artists and members of the “Orders of the Quest” were instrumental in infusing the “Light” and transforming the energy in Italy through their beautiful works of art. Gian Lorenzo Bernini simply took this practice to another level. As an official sculptor for the Vatican, he had extraordinary influence to subtly transform the energy and frequency through his sculptures. A strange coincidence concerns the three Piazza’s mentioned in the book/film that contain an obelisk. In all three cases, the Piazza’s are connected to the Roman Circus. Before I address the reason Bernini chose these Piazza’s for his art, I want to address obelisks in Rome during the 17th century. According to the web site Rome Art Lover’s article on “Obelisks of Rome”:

…The official iconography of the Roman Emperor, strictly defined by Augustus admitted only one exception so that the Emperor could be portrayed as an Egyptian Pharaoh to underline the continuity between the pharaohs and the emperors. In this context Augustus after having defeated Antony and Cleopatra and conquered Egypt in 30 BC brought from Heliopolis to Rome the obelisks dedicated to the Pharaohs Rameses II and Psammetichus II. Other obelisks came from Egypt or were made in Rome in the next three centuries; thirteen of them can still be seen in the streets of Rome.
All the obelisks are no longer in the site where they were erected by the Roman Emperors. In the XVIth century most of them were broken into pieces and they were just another component of the picturesque view of the Roman ruins. They were saved by Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) who used them as focal points for some of the new streets he opened as part of his plan of urban development. Several obelisks were repaired, turned from pagan to Christian monuments by the addition of new inscriptions, topped with a cross and with the heraldic symbols of the pope and eventually moved to the center of a piazza or in front of a basilica.

If we remember from earlier that Pope Sixtus (V) apart from being the Baroque era pope dedicated to making Rome “a great European capital and Baroque city, a visual symbol for the Catholic Church” he was also associated with the assassination of Lorenzo de Medici’s brother. This meant that Pope Sixtus was strongly influenced by the “Shadow.”
The main sculptor associated with Pope Sixtus V’s erecting obelisks in the 16th century is Gian Lorenzo Bernini. The sculptor was directly involved with the erection of obelisks in two of his works, and indirectly with three. But I said that Bernini, was a member of the “Orders of the Quest,” then why would a representative of the “Light” erect a “tool” of the “Shadow?” The answer as I said is Bernini used his talent to take the transmutation of energy to a higher level, which is why Bernini chose piazzas with obelisks connected to the circus. As space does not permit me to cover all examples, I will focus here on two. (I will go into how the energy was transformed in depth in the last stage of the Initiative).
Bernini chose the Piazza del Popolo, because of the obelisk in the center of the piazza. According to the article on Obelisks of Rome on the web site Rome Art Lover, “The obelisk was initially erected by the Pharaoh Rameses (II) in Heliopolis. In 30 BC Augustus brought it to Rome where it was put at the center of Circus Maximus and dedicated to the Sun (in line with its original dedication).” The obelisk “fell during the wars between the Byzantines and the Goths for the control of Rome” and it lay “covered by debris” until in 1587 it was rediscovered. When it was repaired, a little shorter, it was repositioned to Piazza del Popolo, where it was re-erected in 1587. Crowning the top of the obelisk is the heraldic symbols “the mountains and the star of Sixtus (V).”
Bernini was not involved in the actual obelisk; instead he affected the energy through his powerful artwork in the Chigi chapel in the piazza’s Church of Santa Maria del Popolo. According to the entry for the Chigi Chapel on Wikipedia “The Chigi chapel…was designed by Raphael…then completed by Gian Lorenzo Bernini more than a century after Raphael’s death in 1520. Bernini’s patron was Fabio Chigi, who became Pope Alexander (VII) in 1655. In two niches across from each other, interactive sculptures by Bernini, of Habakkuk and the Angel that took him by the hair and transported him to Babylon to succor Daniel, who is represented in the corresponding niche on the opposite wall.” There was one more snippet of information mentioned in the entry for Piazza del Popolo that interested me. It seems that “The Piazza also formerly contained a central fountain, which was moved to the Piazza Nicosia in 1818, when fountains in the form of Egyptian-style lions were added around the base of the obelisk.”
My second example of Bernini’s involvement with the resurgence of obelisks is in his extremely strange sculpture of an elephant with an obelisk on its back. This obelisk according to the article on Obelisks of Rome “was originally erected in Sais, a town in Lower Egypt, by the Pharaoh Apries. In 1667 Gian Lorenzo Bernini erected the small obelisk on top of an elephant (a work by Ercole Ferrata).” The relevant information as to why Bernini chose the Piazza della Minerva is found on the piazza’s entry on Wikipedia. The information concerns not only the piazza, but also its main Church:

Piazza della Minerva is a square in Rome near the Pantheon. Its name derives from the existence of a temple built on the site by Pompey dedicated to Minerva Calcidica, whose statue is now in the Vatican Museums…
The church…is considered the only Gothic church in Rome. It houses the tombs of the St. Catherine of Siena and the Dominican painter Fra Angelico. The father of modern astronomy Galileo Galilei…
The basilica gets its name because, like many early Christian basilicas, it was built directly over (sopra) the foundations of a temple dedicated to the Egyptian goddess Isis, but erroneously assimilated to Minerva.
In front of the church there is one of the most curious monuments of Rome, the so-called Pulcino della Minerva…
It is the shortest of the eleven Egyptian obelisks in Rome and is said to have been one of two obelisks moved from Sais, where they were built during the 589 BC-570 BC reign of the pharaoh Apries, from the Twenty-sixth dynasty of Egypt. The two obelisks were brought to Rome by Diocletian, during his reign as emperor from 284 to 305, for placement at the Temple of Isis which stood nearby. The Latin inscription on the base, chosen by the pope who commissioned the sculpture to support the obelisk found on the site, Alexander VII, is said to represent that “...a strong mind is needed to support a solid knowledge”.
The inspiration for the unusual composition came from Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (“Poliphilo’s Dream of the Strife of Love”), an unusual 15th century novel probably by Francesco Colonna. The novel’s main character meets an elephant made of stone carrying an obelisk, and the accompanying woodcut illustration in the book is quite similar to Bernini’s design for the base for the obelisk. The curious placement of the obelisk through the body of the elephant is identical.

When we remember that Minerva is the Roman equivalent to the Greek goddess of Wisdom Athena, Bernini’s choice of location makes sense. Another obscure reason may be associated with the Hindu, Buddhist elephant god (Archetype) Ganesha. One of the attributes of Ganesha is wisdom.
As for my statement that Bernini raised the practice of infusing the “Light” to a higher level, it concerns his ability to infuse his sculptures with “dynamic movement and emotion.” The use of the medium of stone or marble literally captures the consciousness of the sculptor. That is why we are so emotionally affected by Michelangelo’s David. However, Bernini succeeded in taking us to a much deeper level by capturing emotion in his sculptures. As the entry for Bernini on Wikipedia reported: “Michelangelo expressed David’s psychological fortitude, preparing for battle; Bernini captures the moment when he becomes a hero…”
Returning to the discussion on the accuracy of Angels & Demons, there is little doubt that there were members of the “Orders of the Quest” in Rome during the 17th century that were renowned artists, sculptors and architects. Because these individual’s work was commissioned by the Catholic Church, they operated with impunity. In this way, they were able to affect the energy of Italy by infusing the “Light” with beautiful works of art that reflected The Mysteries. As for the “Illuminati’s Church of Illumination”, the only connection to Bernini and the Castel Sant’Angelo is the “Bridge of Holy Angels” that leads to the fortress. Confirming my assessment that Bernini was transmuting the energy with his sculptures, before Bernini’s exquisite sculptures lined the bridge, a row of gallows adorned the bridge. Bernini’s ten angels portraying the “Passion of the Christ” used emotion to shift the consciousness from death to life, as in eternal life.
The supposition in Angels & Demons that the Castel Sant’Angelo was the Church of Illumination is fictitious. In the late 16th century the fortress held among others Giordano Bruno, who was imprisoned there for six years before his execution in 1600. It is highly unlikely that less than a hundred years later a secret society would have transformed it into their secret meeting place. The members of the “Orders of the Quest” would had no need for a permanent meeting place so near the Vatican, because of the energy generated there. As for the sinister “Illuminati”, this group would not officially surface until the 18th (1700s) century. In the 17th century the enlightened artisans and philosophers’ were peaceful individuals whose sole goal was to bring the Truth to the world. If there was a sect other than the “Orders of the Quest” we can associate them with, it would be the Rosicrucians.
During the 17th century more and more members of the “Orders of the Quest” were activated so to speak and became associated with the Rosicrucians. As there were so many, I will mention just two individuals. The first one selected was Johann Valentin Andreae. This selection surprised me at first, because many believe Andreae was the direct result of the Reformation, because he was a Lutheran theologian. Nonetheless, he was also connected to the Rosicrucian movement, which enforces the movement’s purpose to unite all the religions through knowledge. This is epitomized by my second selection, the Christian mystic Jacob Boehme, because Boehme was also raised in the Lutheran church before delving into The Mysteries. Having connected two individuals to both Lutheranism and Rosicrucianism, I was not surprised to discover that Lutheranism was linked to both Rosicrucianism and Hermeticism.
Although Jacob Boehme was a mystic of this “upstepping”, I will not cover him here. This is because his multiple mystical writings would later inspire a significant member of the “Orders of the Quest” in a later “upstepping.” Nonetheless, although Jacob Boehme’s legacy lasted for several hundred years, he did not leave such a lasting impression as John Dee’s talented student, Francis Bacon, which I discussed earlier. This is because Bacon would succeed in part, by connecting Europe to both Great Britain and America, which is where I now turn to in the third and final part of this Section.

SECTION 8C 1558 C.E 1750 C.E.

Manly P Hall in his The Secret Destiny of America45 speaks at length of Sir Francis Bacon’s connection to America. He says, “Bacon’s secret society was set up in America before the middle of the 17th Century.”46 Apparently, Bacon had seen that his dream for a utopian society could not take root in the England of the 1600s; consequently he looked for more fertile ground in the New World. Unfortunately, this land was already occupied and it is to this situation that I turn to next.


Earlier, I said how the Aztecs, Toltecs and the Incas had deviated from the teachings of The Wisdom Teachers (Christ/Sophia) as Quetzalcoatl, when they began the practice of human sacrifice. But what of the indigenous nations in North America; did they also practice human sacrifice? If I was to believe the “cowboy and Indian” movies that I grew up with as a child then the Native Americans were “blood-thirsty” barbarians that the white settlers needed protection from. However, thank God, a more enlightened movie industry in the latter half of the 20th century decided to show a more historically accurate account of America’s original landlords. Consequently, we now know that there were many different tribes in North America and just like the rest of the world, the various tribes were at different levels of Spiritual Evolution.
The challenge for me was in determining what influenced the ancient Native American tribes of America. In The True Philosophers’ Stone we reported, the indigenous tribes of North America have legends of a Pale Prophet who taught them:

“…Kristina Gale‑Kumar in her book The Phoenix Returns: Aquarius Dawns – Liberation begins47 reports the predictions of the “Pale Prophet,” as recorded by the Native American tribe of Hopi. According to Gale-Kumar, the Native Americans said that the “Pale Prophet” foretold of five cycles of 500 years duration. Quoting the prophecies, she relates “For five full cycles of the dawn Star (approximately 500 years), the rule of the warring strangers will go on to greater and greater orgies of destruction... Are these bearded ones who are still my children going down war’s trail to final destruction, and thus giving the last human victory in death to (War)?… Know that the end will come in five full cycles, for five, the difference between the earth’s number and that of the gleaming Dawn Star, is the number of these children of war-fare.”48

From the above, it is clear the writers of the prophecy were intelligent individuals and that their “teacher” the “Pale Prophet” was a Christ-Like teacher of the Wisdom Religion. The first thing I needed to do was to ascertain which tribes were exposed to the teaching of the Wisdom Religion. The most ancient indigenous tribe I was aware of in North America were the Anasazi or the name they use today, the Pueblo Indians. In researching this indigenous tribe, I learned from an entry on Wikipedia that “The Ancient Pueblo homeland centers on the Colorado Plateau, but extends from central New Mexico…to southern Nevada…However, evidence of Ancient Pueblo culture has been found extending east onto the American Great Plains…”
The author of the entry mentions that the Pueblo’s were affected in 1150 C.E. by “…significant climatic change in the form of a 300 year drought, which also led to the collapse of the Tiawanaku civilization in Bolivia around Lake Titicaca.” The entry also relates that according to “Modern Pueblo oral traditions” the ancestors of Pueblo Indians, the Anasazi “originated to the north of their current settlements, from Shibapu, where they emerged from the underworld through a lake. For unknown ages they were led by war chiefs guided by the Great Spirit across North America.” This leads me to the Anasazi’s connection to the Wisdom Religion. The entry’s explanation of the possible reason for the Anasazi’s and their descendant’s the Pueblo’s apparent disappearance provides an interesting glimpse into the Spiritual life of this tribe:

They settled first in the Anasazi areas for a few hundred years, and then migrated to their current location. The migrations were undertaken to preserve the people from total annihilation, and out of a desire to achieve perfection in their lives and harmony with the environment.
…Evidence also suggests a profound change in the religion in this period. Chacoan and other structures constructed originally along astronomical alignments, and thought to have served important ceremonial purposes to the culture, were systematically dismantled…Habitations were abandoned, tribes split and divided and resettled far elsewhere. This evidence suggests that the religious structures were deliberately abandoned slowly over time. Puebloan tradition holds that the ancestors had achieved great spiritual power and control over natural forces, and used their power in ways that caused nature to change, and caused changes that were never meant to occur. Possibly, the dismantling of their religious structures was an effort to symbolically undo the changes they felt they caused due to their abuse of their spiritual power, and thus make amends with nature…
…Most modern Pueblo peoples …assert the ancient Pueblo did not “vanish” as is commonly portrayed in media presentations or popular books, but migrated to areas in the Southwest with more favorable rainfall and dependable streams. They merged into the various pueblo peoples whose descendants still live in Arizona and New Mexico…

In reading the above, I could assume that the indigenous tribes of the Southwest of America experienced a similar fate to the Mayans of the Yucatan Peninsula. However, what I found most interesting in the entry was the reference to the Anasazi achieving “great spiritual power and control over natural forces”, which resulted in as the tradition says “changes that were never meant to occur.” As the major climate change occurred in the 12th century, we know that there were no Christ-like teachers of the “Light” in North America at this time, so who taught the Anasazi how to control the “natural forces?” I will leave that question unanswered at this time, because the answer will have a profound affect on a much later “upstepping.” Besides, although the tribes of the Southwest would eventually meet up with the white settlers in the 18th century, in the 17th century the western half of North America was still unexplored country. In the 17th century, the indigenous tribes that the English settlers ran into were living on the East coast.


Although, I mentioned earlier that Queen Elizabeth (I) initiated the formation of Virginia, at this juncture I am primarily concerned with the first official “permanent” English settlement in Virginia, namely Jamestown. The entry on Wikipedia for Jamestown relates that the “first permanent English settlement…only survived with a great loss of life.”
Because of the Disney film Pocahontas (real name Matoaka), which is a fictionalized story of the “youngest daughter of Chief Powhatan (real name Wahunsenacawh)”, every child is familiar with the story of how her marriage to John Rolfe in 1614 ended the “First Anglo-Powhatan War.” However, the story behind the legend also reveals the influence on the region and which side, the “Light” or the “Shadow” instigated the Jamestown expedition.
As stated, in the 16th century Queen Elizabeth named the Virginia Colony, by slightly altering the indigenous chief Wingina’s name. However, Jamestown was named to extol King James I, by using the king’s name to claim possession of the “New” World. But that is still only half the story. To discover the underlying purpose for the Jamestown settlement, I needed to dig a little deeper.
The entry for the settlement on Wikipedia relates that the Jamestown settlement’s, which was “founded…on May 14, 1607” original purpose was to obtain “a quick profit from gold mining for its investors while also establishing a permanent foothold in North America for England…Late in 1606, English entrepreneurs set sail with a charter from the Virginia Company of London to establish a colony in the New World.”
In respect to the indigenous inhabitants, the entry records that “While no Native Americans inhabited the area of the settlement, there were an estimated 14,000 Algonquian Indians in the surrounding Chesapeake area. They came to be known as the Powhatan Confederacy, after the name the colonists called their powerful chief, Wahunsenacawh, and lived in several dozen self-governing communities.”
Like the chiefs of the Mayans and Incas of South America, “Wahunsenacawh initially welcomed the settlers and attempted to form an alliance with them…” The reason the chief sought an alliance was because he had his own agenda; he wanted to conquer other “communities which he did not yet control, and to obtain new supplies of metal tools and weapons.” As with so many alliances predicated on power it “quickly deteriorated and led to conflict.” Seeking leverage over the chief, the English settlers “captured” the chief’s daughter, the famous Pocahontas. The ploy worked and Chief Wahunsenacawh immediately “accepted a treaty of peace.”
Nonetheless, the natives of the land were not the only problem the settlers of Jamestown had to face. The entry explains: “During what became called the ‘Starving Time’ in 1609–1610, over 80% of the colonists perished…” However, the author of the entry relates that there was more than one factor involved in the struggle the settlers of Jamestown experienced. For instance, the author thinks that the former social status of the settlers may have been a factor:

Due to the aristocratic backgrounds of many of the new colonists, a historic drought and the communal nature of their work load, progress through the first few years was inconsistent, at best. By 1613, six years after Jamestown’s founding, the organizers and shareholders of the Virginia Land Company were desperate to increase the efficiency and profitability of the struggling colony. Without stockholder consent, Governor Dale assigned 3-acre (12,000 m2) plots to its ‘ancient planters’ and smaller plots to the settlement’s later arrivals. Measurable economic progress was made, and the settlers began expanding their planting to land belonging to local native tribes. That this turnaround coincided with the end of a drought that had begun the year before the settlers arrival probably indicates multiple factors were involved besides the colonists’ aptitude.”

Ultimately, it was the discovery of Tobacco in the Caribbean that saved Jamestown. The hero was John Rolfe who brought the plant from his exploration to the Caribbean. After harvesting a profitable crop, which could be sold in the west, John Rolfe became a wealthy man and in 1614 took Pocahontas as his wife. This union resulted in good relations between the settlers and the natives for “several years.” Nevertheless, after Pocahontas and her father died relations began to sour between the settlers and the natives. This was mainly due to the settler’s greed for more and more native land to grow tobacco, which was made worse because Chief Powhatan was succeeded by his brother “a fierce warrior named Opchanacanough.” When Jamestown became profitable some form of local government was required to administer how the town operated. The entry relates how the first “representative assembly” was formed to determine the law of the land:

“In 1619, the first representative assembly in America convened in a Jamestown church, ‘to establish one equal and uniform government over all Virginia’ which would provide ‘just laws for the happy guiding and governing of the people there inhabiting.’ This became known as the House of Burgesses …Individual land ownership was also instituted, and the colony was divided into four large ‘boroughs’ or ‘incorporations’ called ‘citties’ (sic) by the colonists. Jamestown was located in James Cittie. Initially only men of English origin were permitted to vote. The Polish artisans protested and refused to work if not allowed to vote. On July 12, the court granted the Poles equal voting rights.”

Eventually, the Powhatan Confederacy tired of the settlers and “attempted to eliminate the English colony once and for all. On the morning of March 22, 1622, they attacked outlying plantations and communities up and down the James River in what became known as the Indian Massacre of 1622. The attack killed over 300 settlers, about a third of the English-speaking population…”
To cut a very long story short, the settlers had their revenge on Chief Opchanacanough and the Powhatan Confederacy, when in 1644 during another “large-scale” assault by the natives on Jamestown, the chief was “captured” and “murdered while in custody, and the Powhatan Confederacy was nearly annihilated.” This was to all intents and purposes the end of the native confederacy, because “Most survivors assimilated into the general population, or began living on two reservations in present-day King William County, Virginia, where the Mattaponi and Pamunkey reservations continue in modern times.” As for Jamestown, according to the entry “By the early 18th century, Jamestown was in decline, eventually reverting to a few scattered farms, the period of occupied settlement essentially over.”
So much for the secular and historical interpretation of Jamestown, now I want to discuss the energetic and consciousness perspective of the “first permanent English settlement in North America.” I will start with the original inhabitants, which would appear to have been focused on gaining the upper hand on each other. This tells me that they were not strongly influenced by the “Light.” Nonetheless, the fact that the chief originally greeted the settlers peaceably, despite his ulterior motive, would indicate that the natives were not overly influenced by the “Shadow” either.
Now for the English settlers, their stated mandate was to make “a quick profit from gold mining for its investors while also establishing a permanent foothold in North America for England.” From this information, I would conclude that the “first permanent English settlement” was not instigated by the “Light.” Still, like the native population there is ambiguity as to what consciousness instigated Jamestown.
However, once the settlement was established we can see that the overall influence of the region was the “Shadow.” We can see this in the various wars and attacks and the eventual near annihilation of the indigenous tribes. When we consider that it is very close to the area that will become Washington DC, it is thought-provoking that the first settlement in the country that would represent freedom and individual rights would take the land and deny the rights of the indigenous peoples of the region. Although, I believe that the enterprise of Jamestown was a wholly human conception, we can detect the influence of the “Shadow” in a very subtle way. That way is the introduction of the mass production of tobacco, which would result in causing devastating health problems.
If Jamestown was not the settlement the “Light” inspired to seed North America, then which settlements in the “New” World did the “Light” choose? To find the answer, we will have to return to England at the turn of the 17th century.


When James (I) of England died, his second son Charles (I) ascended to the throne. He succeeded James, because as stated, his elder brother Henry died of typhoid in 1612. Considering that Charles’ sister Elizabeth was the focal point for the “Light” in the Bohemian experiment, one would think that her brother would also be an instrument for the “Light.” Unfortunately, the ascension of King Charles (I) to the throne of England resulted in one of the darkest periods in English history. Nevertheless, as always the “Light” was able to find the “silver lining” within the dark cloud and use it to further the “Light’s” agenda. But before I discuss how the “Light” achieved this, I want to briefly review this important time, by relating the hi-lights from Charles (I) entry on Wikipedia:

Both Charles and James were advocates of the Divine Right of Kings…He famously said: "Kings are not bound to give an account of their actions but to God alone…Those actions were open to misinterpretation, and there were fears as early as 1626 that he was a potential tyrant…
Charles wished to move the Church of England away from Calvinism in a more traditional and sacramental direction. This goal was shared by his main political adviser, Archbishop William Laud. Laud was appointed by Charles as the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633… Laud attempted to ensure religious uniformity by dismissing non-conformist clergymen and closing Puritan organizations…
In November 1641, the House of Commons passed the Grand Remonstrance, a long list of grievances against actions by Charles’s ministers that were asserted to be abuses of royal power Charles had committed since the beginning of his reign…
The Civil War started on 26 October 1642 with the inconclusive Battle of Edgehill and continued indecisively through 1643 and 1644, until the Battle of Naseby tipped the military balance decisively in favour of Parliament. There followed a great number of defeats for the Royalists, and then the Siege of Oxford, from which Charles…put himself into the hands of the Scottish Presbyterian army at Newark, and was taken to nearby Southwell while his “hosts” decided what to do with him. The Presbyterians finally arrived at an agreement with Parliament and delivered Charles to them in 1647…
In January 1649, in response to Charles’s defiance of Parliament even after defeat, and his encouraging the second Civil War while in captivity, the House of Commons passed an Act of Parliament creating a court for Charles’s trial…
His trial on charges of high treason and “other high crimes” began on 20 January 1649, but Charles refused to enter a plea, claiming that no court had jurisdiction over a monarch…
Charles was beheaded on Tuesday 30 January 1649…
With the monarchy overthrown, power was assumed by a Council of State…The Long Parliament …which had been called by Charles I in 1640 continued to exist …until Cromwell forcibly disbanded it completely in 1653. Cromwell then became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland; a monarch in all but name: he was even “invested” on the royal coronation chair. Upon his death in 1658, Cromwell was briefly succeeded by his son; Richard Cromwell…

When we consider the Golden Age of the Elizabethan era, it is hard to contemplate that within a century of Elizabeth’s coronation, the ruling monarch would be publicly beheaded and the country would be completely divided into the Roundheads, (supporters of Parliament) and the Cavaliers, (supporters of the monarchy). Unfortunately, this turn of events meant that the “Shadow’s” influence had taken hold in the British Isles and regrettably “his” influence would “reign” for nearly three hundred years. Fortunately, as I said, the “Light” had found a “silver lining” in this dark period, which would result in the “Light” succeeding in influencing the founding of America. Strangely, the “silver lining” was in the form a strict religious group that left England to avoid persecution, known as the Puritans


Because the Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud had “closed Puritan organizations”, many Puritans left England for Europe. Initially they resettled in the Netherlands, which was then known as Holland. While there they planned to immigrate to the “New” World to start a new life. The emigration of the Puritans, which became known as the Pilgrims of New England was the “silver lining” of the English Civil War the “Light” used to infuse North America with The Mysteries. However, this mass exodus was not without some influence from the “Shadow.” We can see this in several actions perpetrated by the Pilgrims in New England. But first who were these “pilgrims”? As stated, the pilgrims that founded the Plymouth Colony in New England were predominantly of a religious group known as the Puritans.
First let us identify exactly who the Puritans were. According to their entry on Wikipedia, the Puritans originated in England during the 16th and 17th century. A Puritan is defined as “an associate of any number of religious groups advocating for more ‘purity’ of worship and doctrine, as well as personal and group piety.” Essentially the English Puritans believed that Elizabeth I’s reforms in the Church of England were too “tolerant” of Catholicism. The entry sums up the origins and religious mandate of the Puritans thus:

“The Puritans’ movement can be traced back to Edward VI, although the term ‘Puritan’ was not coined until the 1560s, when it appears as a term of abuse for those who proposed further reforms than those adopted by the Elizabethan Religious Settlement of 1559. Throughout the reign of Elizabeth I, the Puritan movement involved both a political and a social component. Politically, the movement attempted, mostly unsuccessfully, to have Parliament pass legislation to replace episcopacy with Presbyterianism, and to alter the 1559 Book of Common Prayer to remove elements considered odious by the Puritans. Socially, the Puritan movement called for a greater commitment to Jesus Christ for greater levels of personal holiness. By the end of Elizabeth's reign, the Puritans constituted a distinct social group within the Church of England who regarded themselves as the godly, and who held out little hope for their neighbors who remained attached to ‘popish superstitions’ and worldliness. Most Puritans were non-Separating Puritans who remained within the Church of England, and only a small number of Puritans became Separating Puritans or Separatists who left the Church of England altogether.”

Amazingly, I learned that the name Puritan was co-opted from the Gnostic sect of the Cathars in southern France. Anyway, having ascertained that the immigration of the Puritans to North America was the “silver lining” in the English Civil War for the “Light”, I wondered how the Puritans would be the “Light’s” instrument. At first I thought the connection to the Gnostic Cathars through their name meant that the Puritans were somehow aligned with Gnosticism, but that was quickly dispelled when I learned the Puritans were influenced by Calvinism. Before moving on to the Puritans becoming the Pilgrim Fathers of the Plymouth Colony, I felt it was important to first nail down their religious beliefs; consequently I will briefly review the Puritan’s spiritual inspiration, John Calvin.


Although I had heard of Calvinism, I was not sure who exactly John Calvin was. I learned from his entry on Wikipedia that he was born in 1509 and he “was an influential French Theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation.” Evidently he left the Catholic Church “around 1530” and had to flee to “Basel, Switzerland” to escape persecution. Calvin’s main claim to fame is “his seminal work Institutes of the Christian Religion.” The entry relates how this “seminal work” developed into four books:

Calvin develops his theology in his biblical commentaries as well as his sermons and treatises, but the most concise expression of his views is found in his magnum opus, the Institutes of the Christian Religion…The first edition from 1536 consisted of only six chapters. The second edition, published in 1539, was three times as long because he added chapters on subjects that appear in Melanchthon's Loci Communes. In 1543, he again added new material and expanded a chapter on the Apostles' Creed. The final edition of the Institutes appeared in 1559. By then, the work consisted of four books of eighty chapters, and each book was named after statements from the creed: Book 1 on God the Creator, Book 2 on the Redeemer in Christ, Book 3 on receiving the Grace of Christ through the Holy Spirit, and Book 4 on the Society of Christ or the Church.
The first statement in the Institutes acknowledges its central theme. It states that the sum of human wisdom consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. Calvin argues that the knowledge of God is not inherent in humanity nor can it be discovered by observing this world. The only way to obtain it is to study scripture…He defends the trinitarian view of God and, in a strong polemical stand against the Catholic Church, argues that images of God lead to idolatry. At the end of the first book, he offers his views on providence…Humans are unable to fully comprehend why God performs any particular action, but whatever good or evil people may practice, their efforts always result in the execution of God's will and judgments.
The second book includes several essays on the original sin and the fall of man, which directly refers to Augustine, who developed these doctrines…In Calvin’s view, sin began with the fall of Adam and propagated to all of humanity. The domination of sin is complete to the point that people are driven to evil. Thus fallen humanity is in need of the redemption that can be found in Christ. But before Calvin expounded on this doctrine, he described the special situation of the Jews who lived during the time of the Old Testament. God made a covenant with Abraham and the substance of the promise was the coming of Christ…
In the third book, Calvin describes how the spiritual union of Christ and humanity is achieved. He first defines faith as the firm and certain knowledge of God in Christ. The immediate effects of faith are repentance and the remission of sin. This is followed by spiritual regeneration, which returns the believer to the state of holiness before Adam’s transgression. However, complete perfection is unattainable in this life, and the believer should expect a continual struggle against sin…He defined justification as ‘the acceptance by which God regards us as righteous whom he has received into grace.’ In this definition, it is clear that it is God who initiates and carries through the action and that people play no role; God is completely sovereign in salvation. Near the end of the book, Calvin describes and defends the doctrine of predestination, a doctrine advanced by Augustine in opposition to the teachings of Pelagius…The principle, in Calvin’s words, is that ‘God adopts some to the hope of life and adjudges others to eternal death.’
The final book describes what he considers to be the true Church and its ministry, authority, and sacraments…For Calvin; the Church was defined as the body of believers who placed Christ at its head. By definition, there was only one ‘catholic’ or ‘universal’ Church…
Calvin defined a sacrament as an earthly sign associated with a promise from God. He accepted only two sacraments as valid under the new covenant: baptism and the Lord’s Supper (in opposition to the Catholic acceptance of seven sacraments). He completely rejected the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and the treatment of the Supper as a sacrifice. He also could not accept the Lutheran doctrine of sacramental union in which Christ was ‘in, with and under’ the elements…Rather than holding a purely symbolic view, Calvin noted that with the participation of the Holy Spirit, faith was nourished and strengthened by the sacrament. In his words, the Eucharistic rite was ‘a secret too sublime for my mind to understand or words to express. I experience it rather than understand it.’ …”

In considering John Calvin’s beliefs, once again I was left scratching my head as to how the Puritans could advance the “Light’s” agenda. Nonetheless, it was important for me to keep the big picture in mind and remember that the “Light’s” goal was to bring the Truth to Humanity. Obviously, if the “Light” had chosen the Puritans as “their” entrance into North America in the 17th century there had to be a very good reason. I wondered if the answer would be found in the Pilgrim Fathers and the Plymouth Colony.


The entry for the Plymouth Colony on Wikipedia gives an extensive study on the Puritans exile from England. It states that the Puritans decided to leave England after King James (I) “declared the Puritans and Protestant Separatists to be undesirable and, in 1607 the Bishop of York raided homes and imprisoned several members of the congregation.” As stated, they first fled to Amsterdam, Holland (Netherlands) and “then to Leiden, in 1609.”
Deciding not to settle in Holland, as I said, the Puritans planned to find a new home in the “New” World and this was how they became the Pilgrim Fathers. The entry relates that in the summer of 1619 “the Pilgrims obtained a land patent from the London Virginia Company, allowing them to settle at the mouth of the Hudson River.” To finance their enterprise the Pilgrims appealed to “the Merchant Adventurers, a group of Puritan businessmen who viewed colonization as a means of both spreading their religion and making a profit.”
Upon acquiring financing the Pilgrims “bought provisions and obtained passage on two ships, the Mayflower and the Speedwell.” Due to several unforeseen occurrences, the voyage to the New World was delayed, and the Pilgrims did not leave Holland aboard the Speedwell until the July of 1620.
Before crossing the Atlantic, both the Speedwell and the Mayflower needed to stop off in Southampton, England “to pick up supplies and additional passengers. Among the passengers to join the group in Southampton was several Pilgrims including William Brewster, who had been in hiding for the better part of a year, and a group of passengers known to the Pilgrims as ‘The Strangers’.” The extra passengers known as the “Strangers” were “recruited by the Merchant Adventurers to provide governance for the colony as well as additional hands to work for the colony’s ventures.” Of the “Strangers” two names stood out for me, the first “Myles Standish, who would be the colony’s military leader.”
The other name mentioned in the entry amused me; this is because it catapulted me back to my school days in England. The Secondary School (High School) I attended was in Billericay, where several families had left on the Mayflower to Plymouth Colony. In my school the student body was divided into four houses, or teams, like the four teams in the Hogwarts School of Harry Potter fame. The house I was assigned to was called the Christopher Martin House. Christopher Martin was the “Stranger” that was “designated by the Merchant Adventurers to act as Governor for the duration of the trans-Atlantic trip…”
Following that digression, I will return to the discussion on the Pilgrim Fathers. According to the entry, the Mayflower “left Plymouth on September 6, 1620, without her sister ship the Speedwell, and sailed for the New World with a land patent allowing them to settle specifically at the mouth of the Hudson River.”
Although the Mayflower is associated with the Pilgrims there were only “twenty-seven” adult Pilgrims among the “seventy adult passengers on the Mayflower.” Moreover, “The forty-three strangers had no religious interest in the colony.” Apart from the aforementioned roles of two of the Strangers above, the remaining “Strangers were personal servants, indentured servants, or adventurous pioneers. Their goal was to seek their fortune in the New World, not to find religious freedom.”
The “patent” from the London Virginia Company was to build a settlement at the “mouth of the Hudson River.” However, this had proved impossible to do as “strong westerly winds” took the ship to Cape Cod and when they tried to correct their course and “sail south to the designated landing site at the mouth of the Hudson” they almost ran aground in “a shallow area of shoals between Cape Cod and Nantucket Island.” As it was now November, “the passengers decided to return north and abandon their original landing plans.”
Again cutting a long story short, despite reservations that the colony was legal, which delayed the actual landing on shore until the Winter Solstice, December 21, 1620 the “first structure, a ‘common house’ of wattle and daub” was built in “two weeks” during “the harsh New England winter.” The first winter for the colony was especially hard and the “colonists suffered greatly from diseases like scurvy, lack of shelter and general conditions onboard ship. 45 of the 102 emigrants died the first winter and were buried on Cole’s Hill. Additional deaths during the first year meant that only 53 people were alive in November 1621 to celebrate the first Thanksgiving.”
Talking of Thanksgiving brings me to the subject of the original inhabitants of “New” England. According to the entry on Wikipedia, “On March 16, 1621,” the colonists had their “first formal contact” with the indigenous peoples of the area. This “contact” was initiated by “A Native American named Samoset” when he “walked boldly into the midst of the settlement and proclaimed, ‘Welcome, Englishmen!’ He had learned some English from fishermen who worked off the coast of Maine.” However, he was only the messenger, and the settlers needed to negotiate with the native leaders Massasoit and Squanto. The author of the entry gives a succinct explanation of the relationship the Native Americans initially had with the colonists of Plymouth Colony. Again due to space I will focus on the most relevant hi-lights:

Massasoit and Squanto were apprehensive about the Pilgrims. In Massasoit’s first contact with the English, several men of his tribe had been killed in an unprovoked attack by English sailors…Squanto had been abducted in 1614 by the English explorer Thomas Hunt and had spent five years in Europe, first as a slave for a group of Spanish monks, then in England…
Samoset returned to Plymouth on March 22 with a delegation from Massasoit that included Squanto; Massasoit joined them shortly thereafter. After an exchange of gifts, Massasoit and Governor Martin established a formal treaty of peace. This treaty ensured that …Massasoit would send his allies to make peaceful negotiations with Plymouth, and that they would come to each other’s aid in a time of war…
After the departure of Massasoit and his men, Squanto remained in Plymouth to teach the Pilgrims how to survive in New England, for example using dead fish to fertilize the soil…
…numerous Native Americans arrived at Plymouth throughout the middle of 1621 with pledges of peace. On July 2, a party of Pilgrims, led by Edward Winslow (who later became the chief diplomat of the colony), set out to continue negotiations with the chief…After meals and an exchange of gifts, Massasoit agreed to an exclusive trading pact with the English—and thus the French, who were also frequent traders in the area—were no longer welcome …
In May 1622, a vessel named the Sparrow arrived carrying seven men from the Merchant Adventurers whose purpose was to seek out a site for a new settlement in the area. Two ships followed shortly thereafter carrying sixty settlers, all men. They spent July and August in Plymouth before moving north to settle in modern Weymouth, Massachusetts at a settlement they named Wessagussett… Responding to reports of a military threat to Wessagussett, Myles Standish organized a militia to defend Wessagussett. However, he found that there had been no attack. He therefore decided on a pre-emptive strike. In an event called ‘Standish’s raid’ by historian Nathaniel Philbrick, he lured two prominent Massachusetts military leaders into a house at Wessagussett under the pretense of sharing a meal and making negotiations. Standish and his men then stabbed and killed the two unsuspecting Native Americans…
In November 1621, one year after the Pilgrims first set foot in New England; a second ship sent by the Merchant Adventurers arrived. Named the Fortune, it arrived with 37 new settlers for Plymouth…Among the passengers of the Fortune were several additional people of the original Leiden congregation, including William Brewster’s son Jonathan, Edward Winslow’s brother John, and Philip Delano (the family name was earlier ‘de la Noye’) whose descendants include President Franklin Delano Roosevelt…
Ships arrived throughout the period between 1629 and 1630 carrying new settlers; though the exact number is unknown, contemporary documents claimed that by January 1630 the colony had almost 300 people. In 1643 the colony had an estimated 600 males fit for military service, implying a total population of about 2,000. By 1690, on the eve of the dissolution of the colony, the estimated total population of Plymouth County, the most populous, was 3,055 people…

In reading the entry I had wondered about the comment that in 1643 there was “an estimated 600 males fit for military service.” That is until I learned about the war between the colonists and the Native Americans. This war was known as the “Pequot War of 1637.” Once again, this war was about greed and power, only it did not originate with a dispute between the colonists and the Native Americans. The dispute was between the “Dutch East India Company and the Plymouth Colony. Predictably, as the colonists grew in population they sought more and more land. The land in dispute that led to the war was “Connecticut River Valley near modern Hartford, Connecticut.” Evidently, the “Dutch fur traders and Plymouth officials…both had deeds that claimed they had rightfully purchased the land from the Pequot.”
Reminiscent of the scene with Tom Cruise in Faraway, when his character takes part in a race to claim plots of land, the entry relates, “A sort of land rush occurred as settlers from Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies tried to beat the Dutch in settling the area.” Of course, neither side was concerned about the original owners of the land, but that was a mistake, because the increase of English colonists “threatened the Pequot.” I will not get into the details of the war; suffice to say that many lives were lost on both sides. I was however interested to learn that the “Plymouth Colony had little to do with the actual fighting in the war…” This is surprising, because later the entry states that “The General Court of Plymouth began using military force to coerce the sale of Wampanoag land to the settlers of the town.”
The Plymouth Colony’s involvement in the Pequot War is described in the actions of one of the Colony’s Governor’s Josiah Winslow. In response to the militia’s frustration with guerilla tactics of the Pequot, the Governor instructed Colonel Benjamin Church to organize a “combined force of English and Native Americans…” The entry explains:

Throughout July 1676, Church’s band would capture hundreds of Native American troops, often without much of a fight, though Philip eluded him. After Church was given permission to grant amnesty to any captured Native Americans who would agree to join the English side, his force grew immensely. Philip was killed by a Pocasset Indian; the war soon ended as an overwhelming English victory.

From the information above, it was still unclear as to whether the local natives were influenced by the “Light” or not. However, the actions of Miles Standish in the “Standish Raids”, strongly suggests that many colonists may have been influenced by the “Shadow.” Although the majority of the Puritan Pilgrims were willing to work with the natives, there is still evidence that some of them were willing to fight the Pequot. So from the historical accounts it was still not clear how the “Light” used the Plymouth Colony to further its agenda. The only other way to discover the strongest influence over a population is to examine it spiritually. Although, from his entry on Wikipedia it was clear to me that John Calvin was not a member of the “Orders of the Quest” it did not preclude some of the Pilgrim Fathers being members. To discover the answer, I needed to learn of the spiritual and religious beliefs of the colonists. As a result I again turned to the entry for the Plymouth Colony on Wikipedia. The entry gives a very extensive account of the beliefs and practices of the colony, so again I have excerpted the most pertinent to my investigation:

The most important religious figure in the colony was John Robinson…Though he never actually set foot in New England; many of his theological pronouncements shaped the nature and character of the Plymouth church...
The Pilgrims practiced infant baptism. The public baptism ceremony was usually performed within six months of birth.
Marriage was considered a civil, rather than religious ceremony…However; the Pilgrims saw this arrangement as Biblical there being no evidence from Scripture that a minister should preside over a wedding.
Besides the Puritan theology espoused by their religious leaders, the people of Plymouth Colony had a strong belief in the supernatural…a Puritan theologian…counseled extensively against turning to magic or wizardry to solve problems. The Pilgrims saw Satan’s work in nearly every calamity that befell them; the dark magical arts were very real and present for them. They believed in the presence of malevolent spirits who brought misfortune to people…
While witchcraft was listed as a capital crime in the 1636 codification of the laws by the Plymouth General Court, there were no actual convictions of witches in Plymouth Colony…
From the perspective of the Church, women were considered equal to men before God…
Plymouth women enjoyed extensive property and legal rights…Women were parties to contracts in Plymouth; most notably prenuptial agreements…Women were also known to occasionally sit on juries in Plymouth…a 1678 inquest into the death of Anne Batson’s child, where the jury was composed of five women and seven men…
The General Court established townships as a means of providing local government over settlements, but reserved for itself the right to control specific distribution of land to individuals within those towns…It was forbidden for individual settlers to purchase land from Native Americans without formal permission from the General Court…
The laws also set out crimes and their associated punishments. There were several crimes that mandated the death penalty: treason, murder, witchcraft, arson, sodomy, rape, bestiality, adultery, and cursing or smiting one’s parents. The actual exercise of the death penalty was fairly rare…
Still used by the town of Plymouth, the seal of the Plymouth Colony was designed in 1629. It depicts four figures within a shield bearing St George’s Cross, apparently in Native-American style clothing, each carrying the burning heart symbol of John Calvin…
The term used by those we now call the Pilgrims was the ‘Saints’. They used the term to indicate their special place among God’s elect, as they subscribed to the Calvinist belief in predestination.
Besides the Pilgrims, or "Saints", the rest of the Mayflower settlers were known as the ‘Strangers’. This group included the non-Pilgrim settlers placed on the Mayflower by the Merchant Adventurers, as well as later settlers who would come for other reasons…and who did not necessarily adhere to the Pilgrim religious ideals. A third group, known as the ‘Particulars’… paid their own ‘particular’ way to America, and thus were not obliged to pay the colony’s debts …
Some of the wealthier families in Plymouth Colony owned black slaves, which unlike the white indentured servants, were considered the property of their owners and passed on to heirs like any other property. Slave ownership was not widespread and very few families possessed the wealth necessary to own slaves…So few were black slaves in the colony that the General Court never saw fit to pass any laws dealing with them…
The colonists adopted Native American agricultural practices and crops. They planted maize, squash, pumpkins, beans, and potatoes. Besides the crops themselves, the Pilgrims learned productive farming techniques from the Native Americans, such as proper crop rotation …In addition to these native crops, the colonists also successfully planted Old World crops such as turnips, carrots, peas, wheat, barley, and oats.

Again the information was not conclusive and reflected the influence of both the “Light” and the “Shadow,” which left me still unclear as to the Plymouth Colony’s involvement in the “Light’s” future for America. At this point, I was reminded of the fact that the “Light” often works in mysterious ways, subtly influencing individuals to promote Spiritual advancement. Consequently, despite the known history of the incredible violence and brutality perpetrated by the English on the indigenous tribes of the New World, the “Light” was successful in seeding The Mysteries into the “New” World. How the “Light” achieved this is a lesson to us all in the meaning in the New Testament of Jesus’ injunction “to resist not evil.”49
Nonetheless, I was a little surprised to later learn that the higher purpose for the Plymouth Colony was to expose the next “upstepping” to a more spiritual way of life. As stated, during the 16th century, the consciousness of Humanity was in the 2nd sub-race of the 7th Root Race. The next “upstepping” was due to occur in the 18th (1700s) century and that was the reason for encouraging hundreds of individuals to immigrate to America. Despite the fact that some of the tribes believed their ancestors had abused their knowledge of magic and changed the weather, there were many tribes, especially on the East coast who lived their lives in full cooperation with nature.
What the historians do not tell us, is that the native tribes practiced Shamanism and as the Schumann resonance had entered into the alpha brain wave level (7 to 13), it was far wider spread than I originally thought. I had already discovered that Shamanism in the form of guided hallucinations and dreams was part of the ancient world, but clearly, I needed to investigate further. According to an entry on Wikipedia:

Shamanistic practices are sometimes claimed to predate all organized religions…Aspects of shamanism are encountered in later, organized religions, generally in their mystic and symbolic practices. Greek paganism was influenced by shamanism, as reflected in…the Eleusian Mysteries, and other mysteries. Some of the shamanic practices of the Greek religion later merged into the Roman religion.
The shamanic practices of many cultures were marginalized with the spread of monotheism in Europe and the Middle East…
The repression of shamanism continued as Catholic influence spread with Spanish colonization. In the Caribbean, and Central and South America, Catholic priests followed in the footsteps of the Conquistadors and were instrumental in the destruction of the local traditions, denouncing practitioners as “devil worshippers” and having them executed…


I will return to the investigation of shamanism later, but for now I want to discuss how the “Light” affected the next “upstepping” by influencing the founding of America. This was because, although the “Light’s” “upstepping” of the consciousness to Root-Race 7 sub-race 3 would not occur until the middle of the 18th century, the impetus for the next “upstepping” began in this “upstepping.” The main catalyst or impetus was the formation of the Church of England and the English colonization of America.


As I reported previously, initially I had wondered if King Henry (VIII) was a representative of the “Light”, as in an actual member of the “Orders of the Quest.” However, after evaluating his life and actions, I concluded that he could not have been a member. That said, although King Henry was not a member of the “Orders of the Quest”, because of the shift that occurred in 1525, he was inspired by the “Light”, at least some of the time. This meant that King Henry could and was used as an instrument of the “Light.”
Although Henry (VIII) was only an instrument of the “Light” for “some of the time”, fortuitously, the “Light” could and did inspire some people for their entire lives. A perfect example of this is Sir Francis Bacon and although I mentioned him earlier, because he was such an influential figure of the 17th century I want to briefly return to this inspired member of the “Orders of the Quest.”
In my investigation of Sir Francis Bacon, I learned that the traditional historical records would not openly help me to understand this enigmatic man’s contribution to history. Historians cite that Francis Bacon was responsible for persuading Queen Elizabeth (I) to behead her cousin, Mary Queen of Scots. Nonetheless, the historians also relate that later Mary’s son, James (I) knighted Francis Bacon and appointed him Lord Chancellor. To me, this did not make sense. If Sir Francis Bacon had been at least partly responsible for King James mother’s death, why would the king reward him? As king, he could easily have had Francis Bacon executed, which would have made more sense if Bacon had indeed been instrumental in the death of James’ mother.
However, Manly P Hall paints a very different picture of Francis Bacon, first though I need to explain what is meant by Mr. Hall’s term “unknown philosophers.” Previously, I said that the members of the “Orders of the Quest” were overseen by the Spiritual “Order of Melchizedek”, which included the consciousness of Sophia. The “unknown philosophers” mentioned in Mr. Hall’s book The Secret Destiny of America, are the members of the “Order of Melchizedek”, who inspire and guide the earthly members of the “Orders of the Quest.” In other words the “unknown philosophers” are the fully conscious spiritual beings behind the “Orders of the Quest”, as opposed to the many members of the “Orders” who were relatively unconscious instruments of the “Light.” In his book Mr. Hall elaborates on the role the members of the Orders of the Quest play in the secret societies set up by the “unknown philosophers”, to which he said:

“We are indebted to these Brothers of the Quest for our sciences, arts, and crafts of today. They were the discoverers; they were the astronomers, scientists, physicians, mathematicians and artists whose works we treasure…They gave knowledge to the world to make men happy. We have used their knowledge to make a few men rich. We have perverted their skill…and profaned their mysticism. But the knowledge they have given us is available to be used in a nobler way, and some day we shall awaken to our responsibility with the realization that is our common duty to restore the dignity of learning and dedicate it unselfishly to the human need.”50

When I first read this it sounded so noble that I wondered why the “Brothers” had not openly declared themselves. As I said, I discovered the answer was that we as a collective consciousness were not ready. So they have kept the sacred Truth safe until now, secretly guiding the Human Race through the many members of the “Orders of the Quest” to spiritually evolve. Mr. Hall relates one of the methods they use to guide us is in mythological figures. “All the petty princes of Europe in medieval times had their Merlins…It is obvious that if these counselors were bound together by some common purpose their collective power would be considerable. And they were bound together, in the secret society of unknown philosophers, moving the crowns of Europe as on a mighty chess board.”51
I was immediately reminded of the conspiracy books about the fear of a secret society bent on world domination. However, that is not the “Order of the Quest’s” purpose at all; their goal is to foster spiritual enlightenment to empower individuals, not dominate them, which is exemplified in their teaching of equality on all levels. I found a perfect explanation of this in a classic writing, Democracy in America52 by Alexis de Tocqueville. It was through this enlightened book that I discovered the purpose the “Light” had in instigating the Plymouth Colony. From the purely secular perspective, this book is heralded by many as a must read for anyone wanting to understand the democratic system in America. Having read it, Craig and I whole-heartedly agree:

“It is not necessary that God himself should speak in order that we may discover the unquestionable signs of his will. It is enough to ascertain what is the habitual course of nature and the constant tendency of events…If the men of our time should be convinced, by attentive observation and sincere reflection, that the gradual and progressive development of social equality is at once the past and future of their history, this discovery alone would confer the sacred character of a Divine decree upon the change. To attempt to check democracy would be in that case to resist the will of God…”53

Irrespective of the conspiracy advocates blanketing everything they don’t understand that is even slightly metaphysical with the term “occult”, it is through The Mysteries, spoken of by Jesus Christ and others that we spiritually progress. That said, because Free Will is sacrosanct, the Divine or the “Light’s” consciousness of Melchizedek and Sophia only offers guidance when it is necessary. As Monsieur Tocqueville said, “The most powerful, the most intelligent, and the most moral classes of the nation have never attempted to take hold of it to guide it. The democracy has consequently been abandoned to its wild instincts…”54
Returning to Francis Bacon, Mr. Hall said, “Bacon’s secret society membership was not limited to England; it was most powerful in Germany, in France, and in the Netherlands…The mystic empire of the wise had no national boundaries and its citizenry was made up of men of good purpose in every land. The Alchemists, Cabalists, Mystics, and Rosicrucians were the incisive instruments of Bacon’s plan. Representatives of these groups migrated to the colonies at an early date and set up their organization in suitable places.”55


Meanwhile, back in England, changes were taking place. As the consciousness of Humanity was preparing again to be “upstepped”, the next stage in unity could take place. I should again state that although the next “upstepping” did not fully take affect until the middle of the 1700s, its affects were felt at the beginning of the century. Consequently, the impetus to unite was growing stronger; this next stage in unity was the forming of the Kingdom of Great Britain, which occurred when in 1707 Scotland, Wales, Ireland and England united under the rule of one government.
Ever since James (VI) of Scotland became James (I) of England, Ireland and Wales in 1603, the four countries had fallen under the rule of one monarch. However, until the Act of Union in 1707, Scotland and England had remained separate kingdoms, with separate parliaments and the ruling monarch having the two titles King of England and King of Scotland. There was only one exception to this practice, during the reign of William and Mary. But first let me catch you up on events since the Civil War.
After Charles (I) was beheaded, and Oliver Cromwell became the Lord Protector, England was divided between the Roundheads (followers of Cromwell) and the Cavaliers (supporters of Charles (I) son). The Cavaliers eventually prevailed and the son of Charles (I), Charles (II) was crowned king in 1661. As this time was pivotal to both England and America, I will pause for a moment to relate the events leading up to the Act of Union. This will involve a brief discussion on Charles (II), his brother James (II) and William of Orange and his wife Queen Mary.


We left England above when the Puritan Oliver Cromwell had become the Lord Protector. After his death in 1658, he was briefly succeeded by his son Richard Cromwell. As Richard was not widely supported in the Parliament, the Cavaliers quickly gained control and removed Richard as Lord Protector, by forcing him to resign in 1659. There followed what historians refer to as the “English Restoration” where as the entry for Charles (II) on Wikipedia says, “Puritanism lost its momentum.” Under the rule of Cromwell, life had become very austere with all theatres closed, but with the reinstatement of the monarchy, the theatres were opened again.
There were several significant events pertinent to our discussion during Charles II’s reign. An outbreak of the Black Death, known as the “Great Plague of London” in 1665 caused both Charles and the Parliament to relocate and the king, “his family and court fled London in July to Salisbury” and the Parliament relocated to “Oxford.”
Many people have speculated that the “Great Plague of London” was ended by the second significant event of Charles II’s reign; namely the “Great Fire of London”, which began in September of 1666. This fire “consumed about 13,200 houses and 87 churches, including St. Paul’s Cathedral.” During the fire, the king and his brother James enhanced their popularity when they “joined and directed the fire-fighting effort.”
The third event was an alliance Charles made with Portugal in its struggle with Spain. The entry relates that “Since 1640, Portugal had been fighting a war of restoration of independence against Spain after a dynastic union of 60 years between the crowns of Spain and Portugal.” When Charles (II) came to the throne of England, the Queen Regent of Portugal, Queen Luisa approached Charles about a marriage alliance between Charles and Catherine of Braganza and the couple was married in “May 1662.” Catherine came with a huge dowry, which included “the territories of Tangier and Bombay. As the entry says, this “had a major lasting influence on the development of the British Empire in India.”
In respect to America, King Charles (II) affected the development of the South when in recognition for “the assistance given to him in gaining the throne, Charles awarded North American lands then known as Carolina—named after his father—to eight nobles (known as Lords Proprietors) in 1663.”
Also according to the entry, “In 1670, Charles…granted a royal charter to establish the Hudson’s Bay Company,” which “eventually became the oldest corporation in Canada. It started out in the lucrative fur trade with the native peoples, but eventually governed and colonized about 7,770,000 square kilometers (3,000,000 square miles) of North America.” The affect Charles II’s reign had on the development on the rest of the world can be seen in “a series of five charters”, in which “Charles granted the British East India Company the rights to autonomous territorial acquisitions, to mint money, to command fortresses and troops, to form alliances, to make war and peace, and to exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction over the acquired areas in India.”
As history has recorded Charles II’s “five charters” led to the British ruling India for nearly three centuries. However, Charles lost favor with “the Cavalier Parliament” when in 1672 he “issued the Royal Declaration of Indulgence.” This “declaration” was in favor of Roman Catholics, by removing the legal consequences under the Law “against Roman Catholics and other religious dissenters.” To make things worst, Charles further angered Parliament when “he openly supported Catholic France and started the Third Anglo-Dutch War.”
After facing opposition from the Cavalier Parliament, “Charles withdrew the Declaration, and also agreed to the Test Act.” This act mandated that all “public officials…receive the sacrament under the forms prescribed by the Church of England.” This mandate eventually expanded into public officials being compelled “to denounce certain teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as ‘superstitious and idolatrous’.”
Like Henry (VIII), Charles (II) had difficulty in producing a male heir. His Portuguese wife, Queen Catherine had gotten pregnant four times between 1662 and 1669, but all four pregnancies had ended in “miscarriages or stillbirths.” Consequently, the heir to the throne was Charles’s Catholic brother James, the Duke of York. The Protestants of the country were concerned about the resurgence of Catholicism if the openly Catholic James took the throne. The entry explains that this is why “Charles agreed that James’s daughter, Mary, should marry the Protestant William of Orange.” The marriage between Mary and William took place November 4th 1677. However, the marriage did not end King Charles’ problems, because a year later in 1678 there was another political crisis. The entry reports thus:

In 1678, Titus Oates, who had been alternately both Anglican and a former Jesuit priest, falsely warned of a ‘Popish Plot’ to assassinate the king, even accusing the Queen of complicity. Charles did not believe the allegations, but ordered his chief minister Lord Danby to investigate. While Lord Danby seems to have been skeptical about Oates’s claims, the Cavalier Parliament took them seriously. The people were seized with an anti-Catholic hysteria; judges and juries across the land condemned the supposed conspirators; numerous innocent individuals were executed.
…Although much of the nation had sought war with Catholic France, Charles had secretly negotiated with Louis XIV, trying to reach an agreement under which England would remain neutral in return for money. Lord Danby had publicly professed that he was hostile to France, but had reservedly agreed to abide by Charles’s wishes. Unfortunately for him, the House of Commons failed to view him as a reluctant participant in the scandal, instead believing that he was the author of the policy. To save Lord Danby from the impeachment trial, Charles dissolved the Cavalier Parliament in January 1679.

Suspicion between the Protestants and Catholics continued again in 1679 when the Protestant Parliament concerned that the English throne could fall to a Catholic monarch, introduced the “Exclusion Bill, which sought to exclude the Duke of York from the line of succession.” Repeating his father Charles I’s actions, to prevent the Exclusion Bill passing, “Charles (II) dissolved the English Parliament, for a second time that year.” It went from bad to worse as “Charles’s hopes for a more moderate Parliament were not fulfilled, within a few months he had dissolved Parliament yet again, after it sought to pass the Exclusion Bill.” This extremely unsettled period, with its ultimate resolution with the death of Charles (II) is related in the entry:

When a new Parliament assembled at Oxford in March 1681, Charles dissolved it for a fourth time after just a few days. During the 1680s, however, popular support for the Exclusion Bill ebbed, and Charles experienced a nationwide surge of loyalty, for many of his subjects felt that Parliament had been too assertive. Lord Shaftesbury was charged with treason and fled to Holland, where he died. For the remainder of his reign, Charles ruled as an absolute monarch.
Charles’s opposition to the Exclusion Bill angered some Protestants. Protestant conspirators formulated the Rye House Plot, a plan to murder the King and the Duke of York as they returned to London after horse races in Newmarket. A great fire, however, destroyed Charles’s lodgings at Newmarket, which forced him to leave the races early thus, inadvertently, avoiding the planned attack. News of the failed plot was leaked. Protestant politicians such as Arthur Capell, 1st Earl of Essex, Algernon Sydney, Lord William Russell and the Duke of Monmouth were implicated in the plot. Lord Essex slit his own throat while imprisoned in the Tower of London; Sydney and Russell were executed for high treason on very flimsy evidence; and the Duke of Monmouth went into exile at the court of William of Orange. Lord Danby and the surviving Catholic lords held in the Tower were released and the King’s Catholic brother, James, acquired greater influence at court. Titus Oates was convicted and imprisoned for defamation.
Charles suffered a sudden apoplectic fit on the morning of 2 February 1685, and died at 11:45 a.m. four days later at Whitehall Palace (at the age of 54…On the last evening of his life he was received into the Roman Catholic Church, though the extent to which he was fully conscious or committed, and with whom the idea originated, is unclear. He was buried in Westminster Abbey…

Like his grandfather James (I), Charles II’s reign was influenced by both the “Light” and the “Shadow.” His policies that created conflict between the Protestants and Catholics, the “awarding” of the Carolina to “eight nobles”, the support of the British East India Company, and the “granting of a royal charter” for the establishment of the Hudson’s Bay Company, were all influenced by the “Shadow.” However, his reign did have glimmers of “Light.” According to the entry, Charles was “a patron of the arts and sciences” and “helped found the Royal Society, a scientific group whose early members included Robert Hooke, Robert Boyle and Sir Isaac Newton.” He also supported the creation of the “Royal Observatory in Greenwich.”
The Royal Society was an organization of the “Orders of the Quest”, which meant the “Orders” under Charles (II) gained a permanent foot-hold in London. Another member of the “Orders of the Quest” supported by King Charles as his personal patron was Sir Christopher Wren, the architect who helped rebuild London after the Great Fire in 1666. Another example of the “Light” influencing King Charles was the Royal Hospital Chelsea, which “Charles founded as a home for retired soldiers in 1682.” Also Charles was instrumental in women performing in theater productions. “Theatre licenses granted by Charles were the first in England to permit women to play female roles on stage (they were previously played by boys).”
Unfortunately, Charles II’s final act of converting to Catholicism meant he left the world in the power of the “Shadow.” His entry on Wikipedia describes his final days in that the king “suffered a sudden apoplectic fit on the morning of 2 February 1685.” He lay dying for three days and then “on the last evening of his life he was received into the Roman Catholic Church.” The author of the entry seems to imply that Charles may not have had all his faculties when he converted. As is evinced in the comment “though the extent to which he was fully conscious or committed, and with whom the idea originated, is unclear.” King Charles (II) died the following morning February 6th at 11:45 at the age of 54.
After Charles’ death his brother James became James (II) of England and James (VII) of Scotland. James brief reign is mainly known for the “Glorious Revolution” that resulted when he tried to implement “absolute monarchy”, which forced his abdication in December just under four years later in December 1688. His entry on Wikipedia provides the hi-lights for his brief reign:

James is best known for his belief in absolute monarchy and his attempts to create religious liberty for his subjects. Both of these went against the wishes of the English Parliament and of most of his subjects…This tension made James’s three-year reign a struggle for supremacy between the English Parliament and the Crown, resulting in his deposition, the passage of the English Bill of Rights, and the Hanoverian succession…

After the Civil War that was instigated by James’ grandfather Charles (I) grandiose ideas, the English Parliament were in no mood to risk another civil war breaking out between the Catholics and Protestants. Consequently, when James began to bring in legislation that was favorable to the Catholics, the Parliament became concerned. The entry relates that:

James allowed Roman Catholics to occupy the highest offices of the Kingdoms, and received at his court the papal nuncio, Ferdinando d’Adda, the first representative from Rome to London since the reign of Mary I…When the King’s Secretary of State, the Earl of Sunderland, began replacing office-holders at court with Catholic favorites, James began to lose the confidence of many of his Anglican supporters…In May 1686, James sought to obtain from the English common-law courts a ruling which showed that his power to dispense with Acts of Parliament was legal…
In 1687, James issued the Declaration of Indulgence, also known as the Declaration for Liberty of Conscience, in which he used his dispensing power to negate the effect of laws punishing Catholics and Protestant Dissenters…At the same time, James provided partial toleration in Scotland, using his dispensing power to grant relief to Catholics and partial relief to Presbyterians.
In 1688, James ordered the Declaration read from the pulpits of every Anglican Church; further alienating the Anglican bishops against the Catholic governor of their church…James provoked further opposition by attempting to reduce the Anglican monopoly on education. At the University of Oxford, James offended Anglicans by allowing Catholics to hold important positions in Christ Church and University College, two of Oxford’s largest colleges. He also attempted to force the Protestant Fellows of Magdalen College to elect Anthony Farmer, a man of generally ill repute who was believed to be secretly Catholic, as their president when the Protestant incumbent died, a violation of the Fellows’ right to elect a candidate of their own choosing...
In April 1688, James re-issued the Declaration of Indulgence, subsequently ordering Anglican clergymen to read it in their churches. When the Archbishop of Canterbury William Sancroft and six other bishops (known as the Seven Bishops) submitted a petition requesting the reconsideration of the King’s religious policies, they were arrested and tried for seditious libel.

According to the entry the situation deteriorated further when the Catholic Queen became pregnant and gave birth to their “Catholic son and heir James Francis Edward.” The Protestant majority saw this as the start of “a Catholic dynasty.” As stated, while his brother Charles (II) was alive, prominent Protestants had tried to introduce the “Exclusion Bill” to prevent the ascension of a Catholic monarch. Although this had failed when the Catholic King James with his Catholic queen took the throne, people saw it as a transitory aberration and that the next monarch would be Protestant. The entry explains that the fear of “a Catholic dynasty” led “several influential Protestants” to declare that the boy “was ‘suppositious’.” It appears that even before the child was born, these “influential” citizens “had already entered into negotiations with William, Prince of Orange.” To cut a long story short, James (II) was replaced by the husband of his niece Mary, William of Orange.
Because James II’s rule had been less than four years, I had thought that it was of very little consequence to the development of England with respect to the “Light.” Nonetheless, like so many other times the most devastating affects to the spiritual progress of Humanity comes from what seems the most subtle and innocuous of changes. To find the affect James (II) had on the “Light’s” agenda, we have to examine the event that occurred during his brother’s Charles II’s reign.
The entry for Charles (II) mentioned a move his Parliament made to exclude his brother James from ascending to the English throne, known as the “Exclusion Bill.” Although the bill failed to prevent James becoming king, it did result in a devastating blow to the spiritual progress of Humanity. In the entry for James, concerning the “Exclusion Crisis” surrounding the “Exclusion Bill” there is an apparently insignificant statement, which would have repercussions up until this very day and would influence the development of America: “The Exclusion Crisis contributed to the development of an English two-party system: the Whigs were those who supported the Bill, while the Tories were those who opposed it…” I will discuss the ramifications of this event later, but for now I want to turn my attention to the successor of James (II), William of Orange and his wife Mary.


When “a group of Protestant nobles” negotiated for William to come to England in June of 1688, according to James II’s entry “By September, it had become clear that William sought to invade…” Accompanied with an army “William arrived on 5 November 1688.” An interesting date for the Protestant William to arrive to depose the Catholic King James (II), as November 5 was the anniversary of the gunpowder plot by the Catholic Guy Fawkes to remove the Protestant King James (I) from the throne. The entry relates that “many Protestant officers…defected and joined William, as did James’s own daughter, Princess Anne…”
Seeing the writing on the wall, “On 11 December, James attempted to flee to France, first throwing the Great Seal of the Realm into the River Thames.” However, the king’s attempt was foiled and after being “captured in Kent; later, he was released and placed under Dutch protective guard.” Although the Catholics were in the minority, their numbers were large enough to mount an adequate opposition to William’s claim to the English throne. An executed Catholic king would only provide a symbolic head to encourage rebellion. Nonetheless, William prudently averted this by allowing James to escape to France to his “cousin and ally, Louis XIV, who offered him a palace and a pension.”
Once James was in France, “William convened a Convention Parliament to decide how to handle James’s flight. While the Parliament refused to depose him, they declared that James, having fled to France and dropped the Great Seal into the Thames, had effectively abdicated the throne, and that the throne had thereby become vacant.”
Following the protocol of succession, “James’s daughter Mary”, William of Orange’s wife was to succeed her father as Queen. As a result, it was decided that Queen Mary would “rule jointly with her husband William, who would be King.” As James was also the King of Scotland, the succession to the Scottish throne was in question. There was an additional problem to overcome, because of the Scottish Parliament’s “belief in the Divine Right of Kings.” Consequently, the Scots did not recognize King James’ abdication. To overcome this, “The Parliament of Scotland on 11 April 1689, declared him to have forfeited the throne.”
In England, the Parliament moved to ensure the end of James’ reign by “passing” the “Bill of Rights that charged James (II) with abusing his power; amongst other things, it criticized the suspension of the Test Acts, the prosecution of the Seven Bishops for merely petitioning the crown, the establishment of a standing army and the imposition of cruel punishments. The Bill also stipulated that no Catholic would henceforth be permitted to ascend to the English throne, nor could any English monarch marry a Catholic…”


As I said, it was during the reign of William and Mary that The Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland became the Kingdom of Britain. The entry for the Kingdom of Britain explains the bench marks that led to this important development:

The Kingdom of Britain was “created by the merger of the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England, under the Acts of Union 1707, to create a single kingdom encompassing the whole of the island of Great Britain. A single parliament and government, based in Westminster, controlled the new kingdom…The kingdoms of England and Scotland were separate states from the 9th century but came into personal union in 1603 when James VI of Scotland succeeded his cousin Elizabeth I as James I of England. Though remaining separate states, this Union of the Crowns meant that the whole of the island of Great Britain was ruled by a single monarch with two titles (King of England and King of Scots), and two parliaments, except during the Interregnum and during the joint reign of William and Mary, who jointly reigned over both Kingdoms. This changed with the Acts of Union 1707, from when the monarch of Great Britain ruled by the power of a single unified Crown of Great Britain and of a single unified parliament. The succession to the throne of England, Ireland and Scotland was determined by the English Act of Settlement, rather than the Scottish equivalent, the Act of Security as this was part of the terms agreed in the 1706 Treaty of Union and put into effect with the two Acts of Union the following year. The adoption of the Act of Settlement required that the heir to the English throne be a Protestant descendant of Sophia of Hanover, affecting the future Hanoverian succession.

The mention of the “Hanoverian succession” transports us back to the events of 1619/1620 in Bohemia. To recap: James (I) daughter Princess Elizabeth became the Electress Palatine in 1613 when she married Frederick (V), then Elector of the Palatinate, and took up her place in the court at Heidelberg. Frederick, at the time headed “the association of Protestant princes in the Holy Roman Empire known as the Evangelical Union.” King James (I) was in favor of the marriage, because the king hoped to “increase” his “ties to these princes.” The entry for Elizabeth relates that “In 1619, Frederick was offered and accepted the crown of Bohemia.” His wife Elizabeth “was crowned Queen of Bohemia on 7 November 1619, three days after her husband was crowned King of Bohemia.” The story of the king and queen of Bohemia is thoroughly covered in Francis Yates’ book The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, which I mentioned earlier.
Because Charles (II) had insisted on James’ daughters being raised as a Protestant, when William died in 1702 James’ daughter Anne succeeded him to the throne. The House of Hanover came into play because as the entry for William and Mary says, “The Act of Settlement provided that, if the line of succession established in the Bill of Rights were to be extinguished, then the crown would go to a German cousin, Sophia, Electress of Hanover, and to her Protestant heirs.” Thus, when Anne died in 1714 (fewer than two months after the death of Sophia), the crown was inherited by George (I), Sophia’s son, the Elector of Hanover and Anne’s second cousin.


As I have repeatedly said both the “Light and the “Shadow’s” agendas were geared towards the final goal of influencing the development in America. Considering the apparent failure of the “Light’s” sponsored union in Bohemia, it is difficult to see how Sophia of Hanover could have any affect on the “Light’s” agenda. Nonetheless, although the “Light” never initiated any violent or negative event, “they” often turned the “Shadow’s” plans to “their” advantage. This is evinced in the connection between Bohemia to England not bearing fruit until a century after Princess Elizabeth married Frederick the Elector Palatine. Before proceeding, I should state that despite the name of Sophia, neither the Duchess nor her daughter-in-law were incarnations of any part of the Divine consciousness of Sophia. I think it may help to relate excerpts from her entry on Wikipedia:

Sophia of Hanover …was the youngest daughter of Frederick V, Elector Palatine, of the House of Wittelsbach, the "Winter King" of Bohemia, and Elizabeth Stuart…
Through the Act of Settlement 1701, an Act of the Westminster Parliament which changed the normal laws of inheritance…Sophia was declared the heiress presumptive to her first cousin once removed, Queen Anne of England…Sophia was never declared heiress presumptive to Scotland…
Sophia was born in exile in The Hague …She was brought up in Leiden until moving back to her mother’s court at The Hague in 1641. Her mother later suggested she marry their neighbor, the exiled Charles II, but Sophia was not interested in marrying her first cousin, and went to live with her brother, Charles I Louis (the new Elector Palatine, who had recently been restored to his lands) in Herrenhausen in 1650…
On 30 September 1658, Sophia married Ernst August, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, at Heidelberg, who in 1692 became the first Elector of Brunswick-Lüneburg. Electors were princes who had the right to vote to elect the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. Ernst August was a second cousin of Sophia’s mother Elizabeth Stuart, as they were both great grandchildren of Christian III of Denmark.
Sophia became a friend and admirer of Gottfried Leibniz while he was a courtier to the House of Brunswick, from 1676 until his death in 1716, and a librarian at Hanover. This friendship resulted in a substantial correspondence…that reveals Sophia to have been a woman of exceptional intellectual ability and curiosity…
Sophia plays an important role in British history and royal lineage…In 1701, the Act of Settlement made her Anne's heiress presumptive for the purpose of cutting off any claim by the Catholic James Francis Edward Stuart, who would otherwise have become James III, as well as denying the throne to many other Catholics and spouses of Catholics who held a claim. The act restricts the British throne to the ‘Protestant heirs’ of Sophia of Hanover who have never been Catholic and who have never married a Catholic.
When the law was passed in 1701, Sophia (age 71), five of her children (ages 35 to 41), and three legitimate grandchildren (ages 14 to 18) were alive. She never had another legitimate grandchild. A year and a half before George I ascended to the throne, his daughter and his nephew married. The result is that all the members of the Line of Succession to the British throne are either a descendant of George II of Great Britain, or of his sister Sophia Dorothea of Hanover. The descendants of Sophia Dorothea are also the Prussian line of kings…The daughters of George II, and his sister Sophia Dorothea, married into royalty in Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden so the line of succession began to include members of these countries from the mid 18th century. By the 1770's further descendants began to marry into the Russian royal family spreading the line to that country and eventually on to most of the countries in Europe…
Upon Sophia’s death, her eldest son Elector George Ludwig of Hanover (1660–1727) became heir presumptive in her place, and weeks later, succeeded Queen Anne as George I. Sophia’s daughter Sophia Charlotte of Hanover (1668-1705) married Frederick I of Prussia, from whom the later Prussian kings and German emperors descend…

So the “Light” had masterfully managed to connect the royal lines of most of Europe to Great Britain. Nonetheless, it would not be through European monarchy that the “Light’s” agenda was fulfilled. Earlier, I said that I could not clearly see how the Pilgrim Fathers of the Plymouth Colony furthered the “Light’s” agenda. For instance, why had they been forced to settle north of their intended destination?
I finally, ascertained the answer when I realized that the “Light” needed uncontaminated ground. It is like I discussed earlier; the reason Akhenaten relocated from Heliopolis to Akhentaten (El-Armarna) was because the former was infused with the World Soul. Let me state that I am not saying that the mouth of the Hudson River area was like Heliopolis, but that the “Light” required “virgin” land so to speak. We may never know why the “Light” chose New England to seed democracy, but it is clear to me that “they” did.
Nonetheless, the seeding of democracy in America first began with the members of the “Orders of the Quest” manifested in England as a branch of the Freemasons. The reason I say a “branch” is because, like some Knights Templars were corrupted by Jacques de Molay’s curse, their descendants the Freemasons were also similarly affected.


In the 18th century the secret society of the Masons became more open, creating “gentleman’s clubs” in England. Up until then, they had remained a secret society. As Rosslyn Chapel seems to portray, the Knights Templar merged into the Freemasons. However, the “Light’s” campaign in Bohemia had resulted in the secret society of the Rosicrucians not the Freemasons, so was there a connection and if so where did the Rosicrucians fit in with the Freemasons? The “Light”, no pun intended came on with a curious entry I found on Wikipedia:

According to Jean Pierre Bayard, two Rosicrucian-inspired Masonic rites emerged from the end of 18th century. One was the Rectified Scottish Rite, which was widespread in Central Europe where there was a strong presence of the “Golden and Rosy Cross”. The other was the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, first practiced in France, in which the 18th degree is called Knight of the Rose Croix.
Although many attempts have been made to learn about the change from “operative” to “speculative” Masonry, no definitive answer has yet been found, other than that it occurred between the end of the 16th and the beginning of the 17th century. Two of the first speculative Masons were Sir Robert Moray and Elias Ashmole.
…Robert Vanloo states that earlier 17th century Rosicrucianism had a considerable influence on Anglo-Saxon Masonry. Hans Schick sees in the Rosicrucian works of Comenius (1592-1670) the ideal of the newly born English Masonry before the foundation of the Grand Lodge in 1717. Comenius was in England during 1641


After reading that Elias Ashmole was one of the first speculative masons, I was curious as to whom he was? I learned that he supported Charles II’s claim to the throne. As the “Light’s” energy was dedicated to fostering equality, I wondered why a Royalist would want to join an order that abhorred the abuse of power. I found this article on Elias Ashmole on Wikipedia:

After the Royalist defeat of 1646, he (Elias Ashmole) retired again to Cheshire. He then met a scholar known as Tyler Parott who helped him travel the world. During this period, he was admitted as a Freemason (the earliest documented admission of a Freemason in an English lodge)…During the 1650s, Ashmole devoted a great deal of energy to the study of alchemy. In 1650 he published Fasciculus Chemicus under the anagrammatic pseudonym James Hasholle. This work was an English translation of two Latin alchemical works…In 1652; he published his most important alchemical work, Theatrum Chemicum Brittannicum, an extensively annotated compilation of alchemical poems in English. The book preserved and made available many works that had previously existed only in privately held manuscripts. It was avidly studied by other alchemists.
In 1653, the alchemist and near-neighbor, William Backhouse…made Ashmole his alchemical “son”, is said to have confided the secret of the Philosopher’s Stone to Ashmole when the former believed himself to be close to death…Ashmole is said to have passed the secret on to Robert Plot, the first keeper of the Ashmolean Museum. Ashmole published his final alchemical work, The Way to Bliss, in 1658. There is no evidence of him personally carrying out any actual experiments (or “operations”, in the alchemical jargon of the time).

It was clear to me that Elias Ashmole was a member of the “Orders of the Quest.” So again, I wondered why he would support the reinstatement of the monarchy. I learned that it concerned, not Charles (II), but his successor James (II). As I tracked the “Light’s” influence and energy through history, I have observed that quite often events put in place by the “Orders of the Quest” do not bear any fruit until much later, as in my dilemma over the Plymouth Colony discussed above. Another example of an event appearing to be the exact opposite in the “Light’s” agenda was the reinstatement of the English monarchy.
From the historical perspective, the restoration of Charles Stuart (II) as the King of England directly led, to the openly Catholic monarch, James Stuart (II) ascending to the throne of England. I mentioned earlier that during his brief reign James (II) abandoned all pretense of supporting the Church of England and set about replacing all the Protestant officials with Catholics. King James also had a huge ego. The Dutch had colonized the eastern seaport in America, calling it New Netherland, with its capital being New Amsterdam. In 1664, after he led the capture of the Dutch territory, James renamed it New York in honor of one of his titles, Duke of York.
Nevertheless, what was much worse was that King James (II) became involved in the slave trade. He did this when he “…headed the Royal African Company, which participated in the slave trade.” As this was so clearly of the “Shadow” I needed to track this heinous company. So I looked the company up on Wikipedia:

The Royal African Company was a slaving company set up by the Stuart family and London merchants once the former retook the English throne in the English Restoration of 1660. It was led by James, Duke of York, Charles II’s brother…
Between 1672 and 1689 it transported around 90,000–100,000 slaves. Its profits made a major contribution to the increase in the financial power of those who controlled London…
The company continued slaving until 1731, when it abandoned slaving in favour of trafficking in ivory and gold dust. It was dissolved in 1752, its successor being the African Company.

On the face of it, the English Restoration of 1660 represented the opposite of equality. Three of the worst travesties against freedom began under these two Stuart kings, so why would the “Orders of the Quest” support them? The simple answer is they did not, they were preparing the way for a king and queen that would restore freedom to Great Britain, which happened after William of Orange, took the throne as William (III) ruling the Kingdom of Britain with his wife Mary, James II’s daughter. We can identify the influence of the “Light” because; as I said it was during their reign that the English Bill of Rights was signed in 1689.
It was this defining act that set the scene for the next “upstepping” in Root-Race 7, which was to occur in America and so we return to America, to see how the ground had been prepared. Once again my guide is Alexis de Tocqueville’s book Democracy in America. As stated, all the colonists that came to America did not have the same agenda. Many of them were “adventurers” seeking a better, more prosperous life for themselves and their family. According to de Tocqueville, it was the small group that settled in New England that sowed the seeds of democracy:

“The settlers who established themselves on the shores of New England all belonged to the more independent classes of their native country. Their union on the soil of America at once presented the singular phenomenon of a society containing neither lords nor common people, and we may almost say, neither rich nor poor. These men possessed, in proportion to their number, a greater mass of intelligence than is to be found in any European nation of our own time. All, perhaps without a single exception, had received a good education, and many were known in Europe for their talents and their acquirements. The other colonies had been founded by adventurers without families; the emigrants of New England brought with them the best elements of order and morality. But what especially distinguished them from all others was the aim of their undertaking. They had not been obliged by necessity to leave their country…Nor did they cross the Atlantic to improve their situation or to increase their wealth; it was a purely intellectual craving, which called them from the comforts of their former homes; and in facing the inevitable sufferings of exile, their object was the triumph of an idea.56

The emigrants of course were the Puritans and descendants of Puritans that had escaped the persecution of England in the 1620s. This provides the reason for the “Light’s” instigation of the Plymouth Colony. De Tocqueville related, “Puritanism was not merely a religious doctrine, but it corresponded in many points with the most absolute democratic and republican theories.”57 What interested me most was the premium the settlers of New England placed on taking care of the poor and education for all: “In the States of New England from the first, the condition of the poor was provided for…It is by the mandates relating to Public Education that the original character of American civilization is at once placed in the clearest light.”58
The townships of New England set up clauses “…establishing schools in every township, and obliging the inhabitants, under pain of heavy fines to support them. Schools of a superior kind were founded in the same manner in the more populous districts. The municipal authorities were bound to enforce the sending of children to school by their parents; they were empowered to inflict fines upon all who refused compliance; and in cases of continued resistance, society assumed the place of the parent, took possession of the child…”59
Clearly, the residents of New England believed in the value of education. Could it be because education is the great equalizer? Anyway, from at least 1650, children of the New England settlers were well educated. Moving forward to the 18th Century, Great Britain has great influence in America, ruling not just the 13 colonies, but 16 smaller ones. When the mother country decided to levy taxes on the colonists, the “Orders of the Quest” deemed that it was time to implement their idea for self-rule.

Although, the planet Uranus wouldn’t be discovered until 1781, eight years after the Boston Tea Party, its influence would have been felt several decades before. Uranus is known in Astrology as the paradigm buster, because it disrupts the status quo. Whether the “Orders of the Quest” were aware of it or not, this was Astrologically an auspicious time to break with the Old World. However, it was important for me to remember that Uranus, although being the higher octave of Mercury, still represented the active or masculine energy. As such, the ego and counterfeit spirit were also strengthened. This can be seen in the wars unleashed in the cause of Justice and equality.
To digress for a moment, Craig made a very enlightened remark about fighting for injustice, it concerned Jesus’ injunction to resist not evil. We were reading Democracy in America, when he said, “The key is to fight for justice, not fight against injustice.” Moreover, he reminded me what a good friend had said about the energetic difference between anti-war and pro-peace. “Whenever we are pro something as in pro-peace then we receive divine guidance, but if we are anti something as in anti-war then we revert back to our egos.” This is what happened in the 18th century, instead of the colonists being motivated by pro-justice they were motivated by anti-injustice and that brought in the “Shadow.”
At this point, I think it may be beneficial to share with you what God told me about the energy of the “Shadow.” Its energy is from the planet Mars, which of course is purely masculine and active. That is why the Romans were so brutal, because they rose in the Age of Aries, which is ruled by Mars. The importance of this will become apparent later, but for now I will return to the 1700s and the American Revolution. As stated, it was the “Mother Country”, England wishing to tax the colonists that sparked the revolution. Nonetheless, wasn’t this dealt with when William and Mary signed the Bill of Rights in 1689? What happened in England during the 18th century?


To recap: Sophia of Hanover died before Queen Anne, so when Anne died, the English throne went to Sophia’s son George. He became George (I) of England. After the Act of Settlement was passed in 1701 not everyone in Parliament was happy that the rule of England was going to a foreigner. It took several years to finally settle the matter, but it resulted in the forming of the United Kingdom in 1707. King George (I) took the throne in 1714. His entry on Wikipedia provides the hi-lights of his reign:

During George's reign the powers of the monarchy diminished and Britain began a transition to the modern system of Cabinet government led by a Prime Minister…
George was born on 28 May 1660 in Osnabrück, then part of the Holy Roman Empire. He was the oldest son of Ernest Augustus, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, and his wife, Sophia of the Rhineland Palatinate. Sophia was the granddaughter of King James I of England through her mother, Elizabeth of Bohemia…
In August 1701, George was invested with the Order of the Garter… William III died the following March, and Sophia became heir presumptive to the new Queen of England, Anne…
George's mother, the Electress Sophia, died on 28 May 1714 at the age of 83…George was now Queen Anne's direct heir. He swiftly revised the membership of the Regency Council that would take power after Anne's death…George was crowned at Westminster Abbey on 20 October…
Within a year of George's accession, the Whigs won an overwhelming victory in the general election of 1715. Several members of the defeated Tory Party sympathized with the Jacobites, and some disgruntled Tories sided with a Jacobite rebellion…The Jacobites sought to put Anne's Catholic half-brother, James …on the Throne…After the rebellion was defeated, although there were some executions and forfeitures, George acted to moderate the Government's response, showed leniency, and spent the income from the forfeited estates on schools for Scotland and paying off part of the national debt.
George's distrust of the Tories aided the passing of power to the Whigs. Whig dominance would grow to be so great under George that the Tories would not return to power for another half-century…
In 1717, he contributed to the creation of the Triple Alliance, an anti-Spanish league composed of Great Britain, France and the United Provinces. In 1718, the Holy Roman Empire was added to the body, which became known as the Quadruple Alliance…The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) had recognised the grandson of King Louis XIV of France, Philip, as the King of Spain on the condition that he gave up his rights to succeed to the French throne. Upon the death of Louis XIV in 1715, however, Philip sought to overturn the treaty…

The year that King George (I) died, the world lost a far more important person. This giant of history is known for his discovery of gravity, but he was so much more. He was a member of the “Orders of the Quest” and was instrumental in carrying forward the “Light’s” agenda in the late-17th century and early-18th century. I am of course speaking of Sir Isaac Newton.


Before I get to Sir Isaac Newton’s role in the “Light’s” agenda, let us first examine his conventional place in history. Once again my source is the web site Wikipedia, where Sir Isaac Newton’s entry informs us that he was born in 1643 and was “an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian.” Isaac Newton’s claim to fame was his book “His Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687.” The entry extols the book saying that it “is by itself considered to be among the most influential books in the history of science…In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries.”
Vindicating Copernicus and Galileo “Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler’s laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.”
For this thesis purpose, his contribution to the “Light’s” agenda is seen in treating occult subjects in a scientific way. For instance, the entry relates:

In his Hypothesis of Light of 1675, Newton posited the existence of the ether to transmit forces between particles. The contact with the theosophist Henry More revived his interest in alchemy. He replaced the ether with occult forces based on Hermetic ideas of attraction and repulsion between particles. John Maynard Keynes, who acquired many of Newton's writings on alchemy, stated that ‘Newton was not the first of the age of reason: he was the last of the magicians.’ Newton’s interest in alchemy cannot be isolated from his contributions to science; however, he did apparently abandon his alchemical researches. (This was at a time when there was no clear distinction between alchemy and science.) Had he not relied on the occult idea of action at a distance, across a vacuum, he might not have developed his theory of gravity.

The above amazed me for two reasons; first I did not think theosophy existed until the late 19th century and second that in the 18th century “there was no clear distinction between alchemy and science.” Of course, there is no difference as alchemy is the “science” of the elements, both literal and mystical.
Evidently, Isaac Newton “wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible.” The author of the entry thinks that “Henry More’s belief in the Universe and rejection of Cartesian dualism may have influenced Newton’s religious ideas. A manuscript he sent to John Locke in which he disputed the existence of the Trinity was never published…”
The Royal Society of London was the repository of all scientific discoveries and Newton became its “President in 1703.” Although an alchemist and scientist, Newton was said to be a very religious man and despite questioning the trinity and the literal interpretation of the Bible had a very strong faith in God. The entry says that Newton said, ‘Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done’.” Ultimately it is Newton’s own words that tell us how he saw God, Creation. The entry reports that:

His scientific fame notwithstanding, Newton's studies of the Bible and of the early Church Fathers were also noteworthy. Newton wrote works on textual criticism, most notably An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture. He also placed the crucifixion of Jesus Christ at 3 April, AD 33, which agrees with one traditionally accepted date. He also attempted, unsuccessfully, to find hidden messages within the Bible.
In his own lifetime, Newton wrote more on religion than he did on natural science. He believed in a rationally immanent world…Thus, the ordered and dynamically informed Universe could be understood, and must be understood, by an active reason. In his correspondence, Newton claimed that in writing the Principia ‘I had an eye upon such Principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity’. He saw evidence of design in the system of the world: ‘Such a wonderful uniformity in the planetary system must be allowed the effect of choice’. But Newton insisted that divine intervention would eventually be required to reform the system, due to the slow growth of instabilities…

Sir Isaac Newton’s ideas affected religious thought of the 18th century. Interestingly, his writings were considered as useful to “combat the emotional and metaphysical superlatives of both superstitious enthusiasm and the threat of atheism…” On the other hand “Deists” hoped Newton’s discoveries and opinions would “demonstrate the possibility of a ‘Natural Religion’.” The entry explains:

The attacks made against pre-Enlightenment ‘magical thinking,’ and the mystical elements of Christianity, were given their foundation with Boyle’s mechanical conception of the Universe. Newton gave Boyle’s ideas their completion through mathematical proofs and, perhaps more importantly, was very successful in popularising them. Newton refashioned the world governed by an interventionist God into a world crafted by a God that designs along rational and universal principles…

To my mind, Newton’s main contribution to the “Light’s” agenda was to give a rational explanation to the Creation and God. It was his scientific “conception of the Universe based upon Natural and rationally understandable laws that became one of the seeds for Enlightenment ideology. Locke and Voltaire applied concepts of Natural Law to political systems advocating intrinsic rights…” Sir Isaac Newton’s three laws of motion revolutionized the accepted concept of the Universe. These three laws are:

Newton’s First Law (also known as the Law of Inertia) states that an object at rest tends to stay at rest and that an object in uniform motion tends to stay in uniform motion unless acted upon by a net external force.
Newton’s Second Law states that an applied force, on an object equals the rate of change of its momentum, with time…
The first and second laws represent a break with the physics of Aristotle, in which it was believed that a force was necessary in order to maintain motion. They state that a force is only needed in order to change an object’s state of motion…
Newton’s Third Law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that any force exerted onto an object has a counterpart force that is exerted in the opposite direction back onto the first object…
Unlike Aristotle’s, Newton’s physics is meant to be universal. For example, the second law applies both to a planet and to a falling stone…

We have a perfect example of how the members of the “Orders of the Quest” are inspired by the “Light” in the account Newton gave for how his theories on gravity originated. While walking in his mother’s garden in England, he watched an apple fall to the ground. This event stimulated his curiosity as to what force caused the apple to fall towards the ground, which in turn made him wonder if that force extended out from the Earth. Newton concluded that:

This power must extend much further than was usually thought. Why not as high as the Moon said he to himself and if so, that must influence her motion and perhaps retain her in her orbit, whereupon he fell a calculating what would be the effect of that supposition.

Of course, Newton was able to demonstrate that “if the force decreased as the inverse square of the distance, one could indeed calculate the Moon’s orbital period, and get good agreement. He guessed the same force was responsible for other orbital motions, and hence named it ‘universal gravitation’.”


As I said George (I) died in 1727, and he was succeeded by his son George (II). George II’s reign was plagued with wars, but all of those wars were on the European continent. His entry on Wikipedia again provides us with a comprehensive view of George II’s reign. Again, I excerpt the most relevant information to this study:

George was crowned at Westminster Abbey on 4 October. The Hanoverian composer Handel was commissioned to write four new anthems for the coronation; one of which, Zadok the Priest, has been sung at every coronation since…
In 1732, by granting a charter to James Oglethorpe, the King created the Province of Georgia in British North America, which was named after him. In 1737 he founded the University of Göttingen in Germany, also named after him…
For the remainder of his life, George did not take any active interest in politics or war. During his last years, the foundation of the Industrial Revolution was laid as the population rose rapidly. British dominance in India increased with the victories of Robert Clive…
In 1752, Great Britain reformed its calendar. It had previously operated under the Julian Calendar, but during 1752 adopted the Gregorian Calendar. The calendar change required omitting eleven days; 2 September was followed by 14 September. Furthermore, 1 January became the official beginning of the New Year, instead of 25 March. The former date had been commonly regarded as the beginning of the New Year for a long time, but the latter was retained in formal usage…
On the morning of 25 October 1760, the King entered his water closet and, after a few minutes, his valet heard a loud crash. He entered the water closet to find the King on the floor...A post mortem revealed that the King died of a ruptured aneurysm of the aorta. He was subsequently buried in Westminster Abbey and was succeeded by his grandson, who became George III.

So I come to the British king that ruled at the time of the Boston Tea Party, George (III). The grandson of George (II), George (III) came to the English throne in 1760. To be honest, when I looked up the accepted cause of the American Revolution on Wikipedia, it was difficult to see a “nefarious” purpose in the British government. The entry relates:


…the British government under George III issued the Royal Proclamation of 1763 that placed a boundary upon the westward expansion of the American colonies. The Proclamation’s goal was to force colonists to negotiate with the Native Americans for the lawful purchase of the land and, therefore, to reduce the costly frontier warfare that had erupted over land conflicts. The Proclamation Line, as it came to be known, was extremely unpopular with the Americans and ultimately became another wedge between the colonists and the British government that would eventually lead to war…

From this entry, it seemed to me that the British were trying to avoid the cost of conflict. Nonetheless, I had learned that the colonists felt it was unfair for them to pay taxes, without being represented in Parliament. So despite the cause of the American Revolution being unclear, I needed to remember that this was the time for the next upstepping of the consciousness, which would take Root Race 7 to sub-race 3. This was achieved in the way America was set up, in which we will discuss in the next “upstepping.”
Back to List at Top of Page

Back to Top


IDEA Foundation Home
Triple 7 Center Home
Gongs Of Change Home

Living Knowledge Page